Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and reason why maybe, just maybe, there should be another vote. “I’m not saying there wasn’t a democratic mandate for Brexit at the time. I’m just saying if I narrowly decided to order fish at a restaurant that was known for chicken, but said it was happy to offer fish, and so far I’ve been waiting three hours, and two chefs who promised to cook the fish had quit, and the third one is promising to deliver the fish in the next five minutes whether it’s cooked or not, or indeed still alive, and all the waiting staff have spent the last few hours arguing amongst themselves about whether I wanted battered cod, grilled salmon, jellied eels or dolphin kebabs, and if large parts of the restaurant appeared to be on fire but no-one was paying attention to it because they were all arguing about fish, I would quite like, just once, to be asked if I definitely still wanted the fish.”" When you end up getting served goldfish then that is exactly what you ordered   | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and reason why maybe, just maybe, there should be another vote. “I’m not saying there wasn’t a democratic mandate for Brexit at the time. I’m just saying if I narrowly decided to order fish at a restaurant that was known for chicken, but said it was happy to offer fish, and so far I’ve been waiting three hours, and two chefs who promised to cook the fish had quit, and the third one is promising to deliver the fish in the next five minutes whether it’s cooked or not, or indeed still alive, and all the waiting staff have spent the last few hours arguing amongst themselves about whether I wanted battered cod, grilled salmon, jellied eels or dolphin kebabs, and if large parts of the restaurant appeared to be on fire but no-one was paying attention to it because they were all arguing about fish, I would quite like, just once, to be asked if I definitely still wanted the fish.”" It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and reason why maybe, just maybe, there should be another vote. “I’m not saying there wasn’t a democratic mandate for Brexit at the time. I’m just saying if I narrowly decided to order fish at a restaurant that was known for chicken, but said it was happy to offer fish, and so far I’ve been waiting three hours, and two chefs who promised to cook the fish had quit, and the third one is promising to deliver the fish in the next five minutes whether it’s cooked or not, or indeed still alive, and all the waiting staff have spent the last few hours arguing amongst themselves about whether I wanted battered cod, grilled salmon, jellied eels or dolphin kebabs, and if large parts of the restaurant appeared to be on fire but no-one was paying attention to it because they were all arguing about fish, I would quite like, just once, to be asked if I definitely still wanted the fish.” It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People." Let me guess. You voted leave? Brexit means Brexit? No deal is a good deal? If you are feeling angry or betrayed or foolish then I am afraid you warned this would happen, do you remember ‘project fear’? You only have yourself to blame . Get over it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People. Let me guess. You voted leave? Brexit means Brexit? No deal is a good deal? If you are feeling angry or betrayed or foolish then I am afraid you warned this would happen, do you remember ‘project fear’? You only have yourself to blame . Get over it " You make a lot of assumptions indeed as you seek to shout down rational argument. I do (as a youngster!) recall the 1970s referendum. The ever increasing integration agenda of the then E.E.C (then a free trade zone only- nothing more) was well known to the government of the day - this agenda was NOT made known to the electorate in any way,shape, or form. They therefore cast their votes on an incomplete (to them) picture. Anecdoteally, I myself have never encountered anyone in my lifetime (now late fifties) that said they voted to remain in the E.E.C. in the seventies referendum. This may be of course be because I have only ever moved in working class circles. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People. Let me guess. You voted leave? Brexit means Brexit? No deal is a good deal? If you are feeling angry or betrayed or foolish then I am afraid you warned this would happen, do you remember ‘project fear’? You only have yourself to blame . Get over it You make a lot of assumptions indeed as you seek to shout down rational argument. I do (as a youngster!) recall the 1970s referendum. The ever increasing integration agenda of the then E.E.C (then a free trade zone only- nothing more) was well known to the government of the day - this agenda was NOT made known to the electorate in any way,shape, or form. They therefore cast their votes on an incomplete (to them) picture. Anecdoteally, I myself have never encountered anyone in my lifetime (now late fifties) that said they voted to remain in the E.E.C. in the seventies referendum. This may be of course be because I have only ever moved in working class circles. " So how does exactly democracy works. Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. If one votes in general election do party that wins majority stays in power until they fully implement their plan for which you have voted for or are you given a chance to change your mind? Considering that many facts unravelled during past 3 years it's only fair and reasonable and just as exactly as almost every vote party suggested beforehand that decision that was made should be revisited. I don't think it should be a stay/leave referendum but a deal(if any agreed)/WTO/stay one. If one presume it was democratic to allow people choice to stay or leave in 2016 then it's also very democratic to allow same people decide the terms on which said leave would happen or call it off altogether. Because if you want to argue that democracy ends on single referendum or vote let's just vote for government once in a generation for better or worse regardless of what happens later. Then of course if you want to be picky and anal why is it that elderly are allowed to decide the fate of the young population. It's not them that will have to live and work through that so why not make it that only people who have at least 10 years to retirement be allowed to vote or better yet let's complicate it more and devise a weight to a vote based on age with elderly having lowest and young highest because it's their fate is decided.
Similarly the argument let's get it done is absurd, it not ends at leaving as after you do, you will have to come back to the negotiating table to work out trade agreement as let's face it, EU as a whole is a biggest economy in the world...might move to second or third after UK leaves but it's still economy you will have to deal it whether you like it or not and as such there will be no end to the debate for years to come. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I don't think it should be a stay/leave referendum but a deal(if any agreed)/WTO/stay one. " Ah, a three way referendum. Your premise here of course would conveniently split the 'Leave' vote only of course. Whilst at the same time giving justified ammunition to those who say we are being told by politicians "you voted wrong last time -vote again until you get it right"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and reason why maybe, just maybe, there should be another vote. “I’m not saying there wasn’t a democratic mandate for Brexit at the time. I’m just saying if I narrowly decided to order fish at a restaurant that was known for chicken, but said it was happy to offer fish, and so far I’ve been waiting three hours, and two chefs who promised to cook the fish had quit, and the third one is promising to deliver the fish in the next five minutes whether it’s cooked or not, or indeed still alive, and all the waiting staff have spent the last few hours arguing amongst themselves about whether I wanted battered cod, grilled salmon, jellied eels or dolphin kebabs, and if large parts of the restaurant appeared to be on fire but no-one was paying attention to it because they were all arguing about fish, I would quite like, just once, to be asked if I definitely still wanted the fish.” It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People." Once it’s implemented we are out end of, and I just cannot see them letting us back in again ever | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. " All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Once it’s implemented we are out end of, and I just cannot see them letting us back in again ever " Well, this is the crux of it. The fact is, we buy more from them than they from us and so a free trade deal between EU/UK is in all our interests. That (and only that) is what folk supposedly voted for in the 70s E.E.C vote. Lets not forget that even a state like Is@el has a free trade deal with the EU (not many people know that). What would be the EU's reason for denying one to us - it would not make sense. They are making it difficult solely because the EU itself is tottering - if we get out clean, other states will think 'we will to - why pay all this money?' The ironic thing is that General DeGaulle never wanted us in in the first place - he saw the U.K. as a 'foot in the door' for the U.S. Intersteing times.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I don't think it should be a stay/leave referendum but a deal(if any agreed)/WTO/stay one. Ah, a three way referendum. Your premise here of course would conveniently split the 'Leave' vote only of course. Whilst at the same time giving justified ammunition to those who say we are being told by politicians "you voted wrong last time -vote again until you get it right" "I am sorry what is it that government argues and debates for nearly 3 years about? Whether to stay or leave or whether to leave with a deal or without one and some parties think it's a mistake to leave at all and want to revoke it altogether. Those are the options on the table, that's what government can't agree on so what sort of referendum you would like to have on? By all means you can have a stay/leave one but you're back to square one if leave then how exactly? If you prefer then you can have one referendum stay/leave then if leave wins have another deal or no deal as without that option you won't progress in any way or form. As if you would want it to be square and fair then you would have to pass law that anyone taking part in campaign for another referendum would need to disclose all personal gains for what they vote for or actions taken to advert personal losses as why Moggs shifted part of its business to Ireland, why Farage was applying for German passport, aren't those are the people that say UK is great and will prosper? For common folk neither of options is viable as insurance policy or move in order to protect or gain from leaving. So do tell how exactly you would want to establish rules of anything at all really with relation to remain/leave dilemma. By the way if you feel you voted wrong it's up to you to deal with the issue. However there are many who voted without being fully aware of what leaving means, no one said about risk of increased food prices, no one said about problems with your next holiday to Europe, no one said no more parcels from Amazon outside UK without incurring additional cost, well maybe remain campaign had but those who voted leave were reassured status quo will pretty much remain unchanged and there will be no impact on common folk as such. Is it how it is though? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I don't think it should be a stay/leave referendum but a deal(if any agreed)/WTO/stay one. Ah, a three way referendum. Your premise here of course would conveniently split the 'Leave' vote only of course. Whilst at the same time giving justified ammunition to those who say we are being told by politicians "you voted wrong last time -vote again until you get it right"
I am sorry what is it that government argues and debates for nearly 3 years about? Whether to stay or leave or whether to leave with a deal or without one and some parties think it's a mistake to leave at all and want to revoke it altogether.
Those are the options on the table, that's what government can't agree on so what sort of referendum you would like to have on?
By all means you can have a stay/leave one but you're back to square one if leave then how exactly? If you prefer then you can have one referendum stay/leave then if leave wins have another deal or no deal as without that option you won't progress in any way or form.
As if you would want it to be square and fair then you would have to pass law that anyone taking part in campaign for another referendum would need to disclose all personal gains for what they vote for or actions taken to advert personal losses as why Moggs shifted part of its business to Ireland, why Farage was applying for German passport, aren't those are the people that say UK is great and will prosper? For common folk neither of options is viable as insurance policy or move in order to protect or gain from leaving. So do tell how exactly you would want to establish rules of anything at all really with relation to remain/leave dilemma.
By the way if you feel you voted wrong it's up to you to deal with the issue. However there are many who voted without being fully aware of what leaving means, no one said about risk of increased food prices, no one said about problems with your next holiday to Europe, no one said no more parcels from Amazon outside UK without incurring additional cost, well maybe remain campaign had but those who voted leave were reassured status quo will pretty much remain unchanged and there will be no impact on common folk as such. Is it how it is though? "Tbh we were warned about that these ‘type ‘ of things would happen if we voted to leave however they were dismissed as ‘project fear’ . If you voted to leave and are feeling angry , upset or foolish then I am afraid you only have yourself to blame . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Once it’s implemented we are out end of, and I just cannot see them letting us back in again ever Well, this is the crux of it. The fact is, we buy more from them than they from us and so a free trade deal between EU/UK is in all our interests. That (and only that) is what folk supposedly voted for in the 70s E.E.C vote. Lets not forget that even a state like Is@el has a free trade deal with the EU (not many people know that). What would be the EU's reason for denying one to us - it would not make sense. They are making it difficult solely because the EU itself is tottering - if we get out clean, other states will think 'we will to - why pay all this money?' The ironic thing is that General DeGaulle never wanted us in in the first place - he saw the U.K. as a 'foot in the door' for the U.S. Intersteing times. "Hahaha who said EU won't give UK free trade deal. Not only yesterday Boris was rightly so corrected by Varadkar that Brexit does not end in October as after that it will be years of negotiating trade deal however do tell does Israel or any country outside EU have all the benefits that UK have as a member? Because it all boils down to that simple fact - free trade deal is on the menu however it will not be the same as one UK currently have and there will be changes and for most they won't be positive. Humour me and do tell if you work or worked at a company have you went to your boss saying - "Listen this employment contract I don't like it, I want out but I do like my salary and other benefits and as you have business due to my work you ought to accept that I will now work 2 days a week and have 5 off but of course I want all the benefits and don't try to make it difficult as you know you need me?". If not maybe do try and see how it works. Hell you can say same thing about marriage, relationship or even being a fuck buddy - there are certain benefits and commitments or being in one and if you don't like it so be it you know where doors are but don't expect things will stay the same. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and reason why maybe, just maybe, there should be another vote. “I’m not saying there wasn’t a democratic mandate for Brexit at the time. I’m just saying if I narrowly decided to order fish at a restaurant that was known for chicken, but said it was happy to offer fish, and so far I’ve been waiting three hours, and two chefs who promised to cook the fish had quit, and the third one is promising to deliver the fish in the next five minutes whether it’s cooked or not, or indeed still alive, and all the waiting staff have spent the last few hours arguing amongst themselves about whether I wanted battered cod, grilled salmon, jellied eels or dolphin kebabs, and if large parts of the restaurant appeared to be on fire but no-one was paying attention to it because they were all arguing about fish, I would quite like, just once, to be asked if I definitely still wanted the fish.” It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People." The people en mass are something to be feared | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. " Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and reason why maybe, just maybe, there should be another vote. “I’m not saying there wasn’t a democratic mandate for Brexit at the time. I’m just saying if I narrowly decided to order fish at a restaurant that was known for chicken, but said it was happy to offer fish, and so far I’ve been waiting three hours, and two chefs who promised to cook the fish had quit, and the third one is promising to deliver the fish in the next five minutes whether it’s cooked or not, or indeed still alive, and all the waiting staff have spent the last few hours arguing amongst themselves about whether I wanted battered cod, grilled salmon, jellied eels or dolphin kebabs, and if large parts of the restaurant appeared to be on fire but no-one was paying attention to it because they were all arguing about fish, I would quite like, just once, to be asked if I definitely still wanted the fish.” It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People. The people en mass are something to be feared " . Yes especially when they don't agree with you it would seem because it's fine if they didn't know what they were voting for but put the cross on remain ain't it?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?" . Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever "Better check your facts about Nigel as he did and was denied. His kids hold German passport...go figure. Google it better there was police case related to said application. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
Better check your facts about Nigel as he did and was denied. His kids hold German passport...go figure.
Google it better there was police case related to said application.". You wanna stop reading Faceache and BuzzFeed. It isn't true, it's just bollocks made up by leftists idiots | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
Better check your facts about Nigel as he did and was denied. His kids hold German passport...go figure.
Google it better there was police case related to said application..
You wanna stop reading Faceache and BuzzFeed.
It isn't true, it's just bollocks made up by leftists idiots"Of course it is because you know better, while you might argue whether Farage himself made application or not he himself admitted his kids hold German passport. Unless he was lying that bastard | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No his kids have had duel citizenship because there mother is bloody German. He doesn't, he's denied it several times. This is a perfect analogy alright "Actually he never denied it. He refused to confirm it. Silence is not denial. And the case against him due to application being made based on false claims of residency was confirmed by Hamburg police. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Because being in the EU or out of the EU doesn't stop you applying for German citizenship, you can still apply when and IF we leave. No favouritism is given to EU citizens, none whatsoever." It is not about favouritism but freedom of movement which British will have significantly reduced after leaving EU. Currently you're free to live and work everywhere no visas, nothing. The way things are going it will change soon enough. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No his kids have had duel citizenship because there mother is bloody German. He doesn't, he's denied it several times. This is a perfect analogy alright
Actually he never denied it. He refused to confirm it. Silence is not denial.
And the case against him due to application being made based on false claims of residency was confirmed by Hamburg police.". He has, he's denied it three times to various outlets. The rest is just made up nonsense. Have you considered wearing a tin foil hat? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and reason why maybe, just maybe, there should be another vote. “I’m not saying there wasn’t a democratic mandate for Brexit at the time. I’m just saying if I narrowly decided to order fish at a restaurant that was known for chicken, but said it was happy to offer fish, and so far I’ve been waiting three hours, and two chefs who promised to cook the fish had quit, and the third one is promising to deliver the fish in the next five minutes whether it’s cooked or not, or indeed still alive, and all the waiting staff have spent the last few hours arguing amongst themselves about whether I wanted battered cod, grilled salmon, jellied eels or dolphin kebabs, and if large parts of the restaurant appeared to be on fire but no-one was paying attention to it because they were all arguing about fish, I would quite like, just once, to be asked if I definitely still wanted the fish.” It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People." So you don’t think the guy in the restaurant should be asked if, due to the utter chaos which his order, anyone should just ask him if he definitely still wants the fish? It had nothing to do with “running scared of The People”, and everything to do with the fact that the referendum was fundamentally flawed, and leaving will almost certainly not be in the best national interest. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Exactly which ones? It's on Twitter that he refused to answer to Adonis question whether he holds German passport. But that aside doesn't even bother you on the slightest that's it's on record that he said if Brexit fails he will just move to EU or that he is chums with Trump and his elites? Asking for a friend." . Twitter is full of fucking idiots, most of them post on here .
And nooooo neither of them quotes are true either.
Listen you posted two complete lies, stop arguing and just say you didn't know any different and we'll let it lie . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I don't think it should be a stay/leave referendum but a deal(if any agreed)/WTO/stay one. Ah, a three way referendum. Your premise here of course would conveniently split the 'Leave' vote only of course. Whilst at the same time giving justified ammunition to those who say we are being told by politicians "you voted wrong last time -vote again until you get it right" "Or more accurately: “Since you voted, it has become increasingly clear that information on which you based your decision was essentially bullshit, and you will almost certainly be worse off if we leave, are you sure you still want to leave?” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Exactly which ones? It's on Twitter that he refused to answer to Adonis question whether he holds German passport. But that aside doesn't even bother you on the slightest that's it's on record that he said if Brexit fails he will just move to EU or that he is chums with Trump and his elites? Asking for a friend.. Twitter is full of fucking idiots, most of them post on here .
And nooooo neither of them quotes are true either.
Listen you posted two complete lies, stop arguing and just say you didn't know any different and we'll let it lie ."And is that because you decided what you say is true. Not sure if you know but it was TV show featuring Nigel and Adonis. It's on record. You failed to answer my other question. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I don't think it should be a stay/leave referendum but a deal(if any agreed)/WTO/stay one. Ah, a three way referendum. Your premise here of course would conveniently split the 'Leave' vote only of course. Whilst at the same time giving justified ammunition to those who say we are being told by politicians "you voted wrong last time -vote again until you get it right"
Or more accurately:
“Since you voted, it has become increasingly clear that information on which you based your decision was essentially bullshit, and you will almost certainly be worse off if we leave, are you sure you still want to leave?”"Pretty much with complimentary red bus...or blue  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. " It’s not scaremongering though is it? You put the word projections in inverted commas as if they are made up nonsense based on nothing. They are not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever "I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg. If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg.
If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course....
". He's had no active say in the company since 2010 when he became an MP and completely stepped down since taking the cabinet role,this is backed by fellow owners, board meetings, transcripts and printed in the ft. Just because it's said on here 20 times a day don't make it true | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg.
If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course....
.
He's had no active say in the company since 2010 when he became an MP and completely stepped down since taking the cabinet role,this is backed by fellow owners, board meetings, transcripts and printed in the ft.
Just because it's said on here 20 times a day don't make it true"Granted but memos revealed that same company warned about immediate negative impact of brexit, then it gets muddied because choice to move to Ireland is of course not dictated by brexit and said legal advice but other factors....or so they say. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Exactly which ones? It's on Twitter that he refused to answer to Adonis question whether he holds German passport. But that aside doesn't even bother you on the slightest that's it's on record that he said if Brexit fails he will just move to EU or that he is chums with Trump and his elites? Asking for a friend.. Twitter is full of fucking idiots, most of them post on here .
And nooooo neither of them quotes are true either.
Listen you posted two complete lies, stop arguing and just say you didn't know any different and we'll let it lie .
And is that because you decided what you say is true. Not sure if you know but it was TV show featuring Nigel and Adonis. It's on record.
You failed to answer my other question.". No I was refuting your insertion that he applied for German citizenship, there's no evidence he did it was just some bozo on Facebook that saw him at an embassy and made the rest up, he's denied it to three yes three publications and Germany doesn't hold any record of an attempt to do it. Your just sounding crazier and crazier. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Exactly which ones? It's on Twitter that he refused to answer to Adonis question whether he holds German passport. But that aside doesn't even bother you on the slightest that's it's on record that he said if Brexit fails he will just move to EU or that he is chums with Trump and his elites? Asking for a friend.. Twitter is full of fucking idiots, most of them post on here .
And nooooo neither of them quotes are true either.
Listen you posted two complete lies, stop arguing and just say you didn't know any different and we'll let it lie .
And is that because you decided what you say is true. Not sure if you know but it was TV show featuring Nigel and Adonis. It's on record.
You failed to answer my other question..
No I was refuting your insertion that he applied for German citizenship, there's no evidence he did it was just some bozo on Facebook that saw him at an embassy and made the rest up, he's denied it to three yes three publications and Germany doesn't hold any record of an attempt to do it.
Your just sounding crazier and crazier."Actually according to some sources it goes a bit deeper than that as some bozo in Hamburg interested in British politics made notice of said assertion and contacted police about possible breach of law as you need to be resident for 3 years in Germany to make application. Hamburg police confirmed that said case exist and is under investigation however not released anymore info due to ongoing investigation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There's no disputing with the tin foil hat brigade. Ooh to hell with it, I think Nigel secretly runs Somerset capital along with sherga and lord Lucan. There offering pizza to entrap the d*unken EU officials so they can take over the world like a mad bond villain.. That's it case closed,#stopbrexit "You would have to run that with Hamburg police not me, we can debate validity of any article in any news or any claim online. That being said I failed to find any source saying he outright denied claim he seemed to obtain German passport. Pretty much every source I have found report he refused to deny claims and in TV debate with Lord Adonis he again explicitly refused to answer question if he holds German passport, he did not said it is a lie, he did not say it's not true,he refused to answer the question. That's all I know. In all honesty I didn't even know it all started with some Facebook post haha | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have some sources that go even further and say the EU commissioners are secretly rounding up small children in a wagon pulled by horses all while wearing a terrible disguise. Come out come out wherever you are. "I don't think links are allowed on the forum, should you need you can use Google. This article and many others claiming that garage refused to deny claim are available. Might be remoaners propaganda or cowspiracy of sort misrepresenting what's been told on TV show or what Farage said. Don't know. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There's no disputing with the tin foil hat brigade. Ooh to hell with it, I think Nigel secretly runs Somerset capital along with sherga and lord Lucan. There offering pizza to entrap the d*unken EU officials so they can take over the world like a mad bond villain.. That's it case closed,#stopbrexit "By the way I think Nigel works secretly for Merkel. It all makes sense, he spearheaded Brexit to weaken the UK so that it can be taken over by Germans which secretly been bringing in own spies and military hidden along the German car parts for years. Who knows who knows, it all adds up. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg.
If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course....
.
He's had no active say in the company since 2010 when he became an MP and completely stepped down since taking the cabinet role,this is backed by fellow owners, board meetings, transcripts and printed in the ft.
Just because it's said on here 20 times a day don't make it true"I still think that’s incredibly naive. David Attenborough has no say whatsoever in McDonalds, but that didn’t stop the dropping plastic straws... I’m just saying you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing a course of action that they know runs counter the best economic interests of the country. Any thoughts why that might be? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg.
If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course....
.
He's had no active say in the company since 2010 when he became an MP and completely stepped down since taking the cabinet role,this is backed by fellow owners, board meetings, transcripts and printed in the ft.
Just because it's said on here 20 times a day don't make it true
I still think that’s incredibly naive.
David Attenborough has no say whatsoever in McDonalds, but that didn’t stop the dropping plastic straws...
I’m just saying you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing a course of action that they know runs counter the best economic interests of the country.
Any thoughts why that might be?". Hellbent?.. It's been 3 years! Fuck me your idea of hellbent is different to mine | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll give you a clue, the Tories are a party of mostly remainers, the pm call me Dave I'll campaign for remain, he was one, the Gideon chancellor, he was another, Mrs maybot, yep she was one as well, the yellow hammer chancellor, another, even Boris was almost one, it took him ages to decide to vote leave, his brother was an even bigger one, Dominic Cummins fell out with everybody who even remotely suggested leaving without a deal... But it's suddenly dawned on them. If they don't pull this brexit shit off once and for all, there finished as a party, kaput, the end. The boss (the electorate) has finally had enough. Trust me they all know it, the next election will be carnage for remain MPs in leave seats. " You seem to think that Brexit is the only thing people will consider when voting? You can’t be that naive | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll give you a clue, the Tories are a party of mostly remainers, the pm call me Dave I'll campaign for remain, he was one, the Gideon chancellor, he was another, Mrs maybot, yep she was one as well, the yellow hammer chancellor, another, even Boris was almost one, it took him ages to decide to vote leave, his brother was an even bigger one, Dominic Cummins fell out with everybody who even remotely suggested leaving without a deal... But it's suddenly dawned on them. If they don't pull this brexit shit off once and for all, there finished as a party, kaput, the end. The boss (the electorate) has finally had enough. Trust me they all know it, the next election will be carnage for remain MPs in leave seats. You seem to think that Brexit is the only thing people will consider when voting? You can’t be that naive " . No I just know a bit about human nature and mob mentality. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll give you a clue, the Tories are a party of mostly remainers, the pm call me Dave I'll campaign for remain, he was one, the Gideon chancellor, he was another, Mrs maybot, yep she was one as well, the yellow hammer chancellor, another, even Boris was almost one, it took him ages to decide to vote leave, his brother was an even bigger one, Dominic Cummins fell out with everybody who even remotely suggested leaving without a deal... But it's suddenly dawned on them. If they don't pull this brexit shit off once and for all, there finished as a party, kaput, the end. The boss (the electorate) has finally had enough. Trust me they all know it, the next election will be carnage for remain MPs in leave seats. You seem to think that Brexit is the only thing people will consider when voting? You can’t be that naive . No I just know a bit about human nature and mob mentality. "So you say? Tbh I won’t take your word for it. A GE won’t solve or prove anything. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll give you a clue, the Tories are a party of mostly remainers, the pm call me Dave I'll campaign for remain, he was one, the Gideon chancellor, he was another, Mrs maybot, yep she was one as well, the yellow hammer chancellor, another, even Boris was almost one, it took him ages to decide to vote leave, his brother was an even bigger one, Dominic Cummins fell out with everybody who even remotely suggested leaving without a deal... But it's suddenly dawned on them. If they don't pull this brexit shit off once and for all, there finished as a party, kaput, the end. The boss (the electorate) has finally had enough. Trust me they all know it, the next election will be carnage for remain MPs in leave seats. You seem to think that Brexit is the only thing people will consider when voting? You can’t be that naive . No I just know a bit about human nature and mob mentality.
So you say? Tbh I won’t take your word for it. A GE won’t solve or prove anything.". Coz it will? It will prove I'm right | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll give you a clue, the Tories are a party of mostly remainers, the pm call me Dave I'll campaign for remain, he was one, the Gideon chancellor, he was another, Mrs maybot, yep she was one as well, the yellow hammer chancellor, another, even Boris was almost one, it took him ages to decide to vote leave, his brother was an even bigger one, Dominic Cummins fell out with everybody who even remotely suggested leaving without a deal... But it's suddenly dawned on them. If they don't pull this brexit shit off once and for all, there finished as a party, kaput, the end. The boss (the electorate) has finally had enough. Trust me they all know it, the next election will be carnage for remain MPs in leave seats. You seem to think that Brexit is the only thing people will consider when voting? You can’t be that naive . No I just know a bit about human nature and mob mentality.
So you say? Tbh I won’t take your word for it. A GE won’t solve or prove anything..
Coz it will? It will prove I'm right "Of course it will. I am guessing you predicted that voting leave would cause the current shitstorm ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg.
If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course....
.
He's had no active say in the company since 2010 when he became an MP and completely stepped down since taking the cabinet role,this is backed by fellow owners, board meetings, transcripts and printed in the ft.
Just because it's said on here 20 times a day don't make it true
I still think that’s incredibly naive.
David Attenborough has no say whatsoever in McDonalds, but that didn’t stop the dropping plastic straws...
I’m just saying you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing a course of action that they know runs counter the best economic interests of the country.
Any thoughts why that might be?.
Hellbent?.. It's been 3 years!
Fuck me your idea of hellbent is different to mine "I’m not sure leaving without a deal was the government’s plan three years ago. Nice dodge though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll give you a clue, the Tories are a party of mostly remainers, the pm call me Dave I'll campaign for remain, he was one, the Gideon chancellor, he was another, Mrs maybot, yep she was one as well, the yellow hammer chancellor, another, even Boris was almost one, it took him ages to decide to vote leave, his brother was an even bigger one, Dominic Cummins fell out with everybody who even remotely suggested leaving without a deal... But it's suddenly dawned on them. If they don't pull this brexit shit off once and for all, there finished as a party, kaput, the end. The boss (the electorate) has finally had enough. Trust me they all know it, the next election will be carnage for remain MPs in leave seats. You seem to think that Brexit is the only thing people will consider when voting? You can’t be that naive . No I just know a bit about human nature and mob mentality.
So you say? Tbh I won’t take your word for it. A GE won’t solve or prove anything..
Coz it will? It will prove I'm right
Of course it will. I am guessing you predicted that voting leave would cause the currently shitstorm ? ". Yes I did. That's why I was a reluctant remain voter .
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg.
If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course....
.
He's had no active say in the company since 2010 when he became an MP and completely stepped down since taking the cabinet role,this is backed by fellow owners, board meetings, transcripts and printed in the ft.
Just because it's said on here 20 times a day don't make it true
I still think that’s incredibly naive.
David Attenborough has no say whatsoever in McDonalds, but that didn’t stop the dropping plastic straws...
I’m just saying you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing a course of action that they know runs counter the best economic interests of the country.
Any thoughts why that might be?.
Hellbent?.. It's been 3 years!
Fuck me your idea of hellbent is different to mine
I’m not sure leaving without a deal was the government’s plan three years ago.
Nice dodge though. ". Leaving without a plan wasn't a plan because they never intended to leave full stop. They just massively miscalculated public reactions and thought it would all blow over There is no deal and never was except that shit maybot deal and they voted that down because it was even more unpalatable than no deal. It was leave or remain, always was, anybody with two brain cells could see this coming, well anybody except this forum, most of Twitter and everybody working in journalism  .
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'll give you a clue, the Tories are a party of mostly remainers, the pm call me Dave I'll campaign for remain, he was one, the Gideon chancellor, he was another, Mrs maybot, yep she was one as well, the yellow hammer chancellor, another, even Boris was almost one, it took him ages to decide to vote leave, his brother was an even bigger one, Dominic Cummins fell out with everybody who even remotely suggested leaving without a deal... But it's suddenly dawned on them. If they don't pull this brexit shit off once and for all, there finished as a party, kaput, the end. The boss (the electorate) has finally had enough. Trust me they all know it, the next election will be carnage for remain MPs in leave seats. You seem to think that Brexit is the only thing people will consider when voting? You can’t be that naive . No I just know a bit about human nature and mob mentality.
So you say? Tbh I won’t take your word for it. A GE won’t solve or prove anything..
Coz it will? It will prove I'm right
Of course it will. I am guessing you predicted that voting leave would cause the currently shitstorm ? .
Yes I did.
That's why I was a reluctant remain voter .
"So you say | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg.
If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course....
.
He's had no active say in the company since 2010 when he became an MP and completely stepped down since taking the cabinet role,this is backed by fellow owners, board meetings, transcripts and printed in the ft.
Just because it's said on here 20 times a day don't make it true
I still think that’s incredibly naive.
David Attenborough has no say whatsoever in McDonalds, but that didn’t stop the dropping plastic straws...
I’m just saying you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing a course of action that they know runs counter the best economic interests of the country.
Any thoughts why that might be?.
Hellbent?.. It's been 3 years!
Fuck me your idea of hellbent is different to mine
I’m not sure leaving without a deal was the government’s plan three years ago.
Nice dodge though. .
Leaving without a plan wasn't a plan because they never intended to leave full stop.
They just massively miscalculated public reactions and thought it would all blow over
There is no deal and never was except that shit maybot deal and they voted that down because it was even more unpalatable than no deal.
It was leave or remain, always was, anybody with two brain cells could see this coming, well anybody except this forum, most of Twitter and everybody working in journalism .
"Ahh....where is Centy when you need a rational argument? Him and Scania Man (Pat) were so entertaining.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg.
If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course....
.
He's had no active say in the company since 2010 when he became an MP and completely stepped down since taking the cabinet role,this is backed by fellow owners, board meetings, transcripts and printed in the ft.
Just because it's said on here 20 times a day don't make it true
I still think that’s incredibly naive.
David Attenborough has no say whatsoever in McDonalds, but that didn’t stop the dropping plastic straws...
I’m just saying you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing a course of action that they know runs counter the best economic interests of the country.
Any thoughts why that might be?.
Hellbent?.. It's been 3 years!
Fuck me your idea of hellbent is different to mine
I’m not sure leaving without a deal was the government’s plan three years ago.
Nice dodge though. .
Leaving without a plan wasn't a plan because they never intended to leave full stop.
They just massively miscalculated public reactions and thought it would all blow over
There is no deal and never was except that shit maybot deal and they voted that down because it was even more unpalatable than no deal.
It was leave or remain, always was, anybody with two brain cells could see this coming, well anybody except this forum, most of Twitter and everybody working in journalism .
"The question remains though.... Why would any responsible government be so hellbent on forcing through a no deal exit, knowing full well that it would almost certainly be disastrous? Doesn’t that strike you as just a little reckless? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg.
If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course....
.
He's had no active say in the company since 2010 when he became an MP and completely stepped down since taking the cabinet role,this is backed by fellow owners, board meetings, transcripts and printed in the ft.
Just because it's said on here 20 times a day don't make it true
I still think that’s incredibly naive.
David Attenborough has no say whatsoever in McDonalds, but that didn’t stop the dropping plastic straws...
I’m just saying you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing a course of action that they know runs counter the best economic interests of the country.
Any thoughts why that might be?.
Hellbent?.. It's been 3 years!
Fuck me your idea of hellbent is different to mine
I’m not sure leaving without a deal was the government’s plan three years ago.
Nice dodge though. .
Leaving without a plan wasn't a plan because they never intended to leave full stop.
They just massively miscalculated public reactions and thought it would all blow over
There is no deal and never was except that shit maybot deal and they voted that down because it was even more unpalatable than no deal.
It was leave or remain, always was, anybody with two brain cells could see this coming, well anybody except this forum, most of Twitter and everybody working in journalism .
Ahh....where is Centy when you need a rational argument? Him and Scania Man (Pat) were so entertaining....". Who were you before you joined 6 weeks ago then?,I mean you must have been here before because I've never heard of either of those and I've been here months!. .
Or are you another one with multiple profiles, seems like that's the in thing on here . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. All referendums are advisory. They advise parliament on the ACTUAL view of the elctorate - as opposed to opinion polls which are based on small sample groups. Yes, people are allowed to change their minds, but, in the case of general elections (that you have chosen as an example) the result of such elections is implemented immediately. We then have the opportunity to 'change our minds' once we have experienced what it is we voted for. The call for a second referendum is not based on facts. It is based on more project fear. More scaremongering. More 'projections'. The result has not been implemented - despite 84% of votes in 2017 going to parties promising to deliver on that vote in their manifestos. Going back to your point about people changing their minds, this is an argument presented by remainers who make the assumption that it is leavers who now want to remain and failing to recognise that many remain voters would now vote to leave. Explain to me in layman terms if it's project fear why Moggs shifted operations to Ireland, why Farage applied for German passport, why some invest 100k in companies that will deal with negative impact of leaving EU. Shouldn't people who campaign to leave know best that there is nothing to fear and no need to move operations to EU or that companies that will deal with negative impact are doomed to fail so it's a bad investment? I mean common they know best that UK will be land of milk and honey so why invest in failed ventures...is it that they have so much money they consciously want to lose them?. Mogg doesn't have any say in the company he has a 15% share in and Nigel hasn't applied for a German passport. But yeah whattttever
I don’t know about Farage’s passport. But I’d say that a very naive view to take on Rees-Mogg.
If we are at least agreed that leaving without a deal will be a disaster economically, you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing that course....
.
He's had no active say in the company since 2010 when he became an MP and completely stepped down since taking the cabinet role,this is backed by fellow owners, board meetings, transcripts and printed in the ft.
Just because it's said on here 20 times a day don't make it true
I still think that’s incredibly naive.
David Attenborough has no say whatsoever in McDonalds, but that didn’t stop the dropping plastic straws...
I’m just saying you really have to wonder why the government is so hellbent on pursuing a course of action that they know runs counter the best economic interests of the country.
Any thoughts why that might be?.
Hellbent?.. It's been 3 years!
Fuck me your idea of hellbent is different to mine
I’m not sure leaving without a deal was the government’s plan three years ago.
Nice dodge though. .
Leaving without a plan wasn't a plan because they never intended to leave full stop.
They just massively miscalculated public reactions and thought it would all blow over
There is no deal and never was except that shit maybot deal and they voted that down because it was even more unpalatable than no deal.
It was leave or remain, always was, anybody with two brain cells could see this coming, well anybody except this forum, most of Twitter and everybody working in journalism .
Ahh....where is Centy when you need a rational argument? Him and Scania Man (Pat) were so entertaining.....
Who were you before you joined 6 weeks ago then?,I mean you must have been here before because I've never heard of either of those and I've been here months!..
Or are you another one with multiple profiles, seems like that's the in thing on here ."I have been on and off fab for something like six years now - sometimes I left because I got depressed by it and other times because I got into fights on the forums which got me barred from posting. You can always ask the long standing and wise members like fabio or saraj who those two particular characters were but as you seem to be focussing on me at the moment I will tell you now that I have only ever had one profile when I am on the site because I cant see the point in having multiple ones. Perhaps you have more experience of this? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People. Let me guess. You voted leave? Brexit means Brexit? No deal is a good deal? If you are feeling angry or betrayed or foolish then I am afraid you warned this would happen, do you remember ‘project fear’? You only have yourself to blame . Get over it You make a lot of assumptions indeed as you seek to shout down rational argument. I do (as a youngster!) recall the 1970s referendum. The ever increasing integration agenda of the then E.E.C (then a free trade zone only- nothing more) was well known to the government of the day - this agenda was NOT made known to the electorate in any way,shape, or form. They therefore cast their votes on an incomplete (to them) picture. Anecdoteally, I myself have never encountered anyone in my lifetime (now late fifties) that said they voted to remain in the E.E.C. in the seventies referendum. This may be of course be because I have only ever moved in working class circles. So how does exactly democracy works. Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. If one votes in general election do party that wins majority stays in power until they fully implement their plan for which you have voted for or are you given a chance to change your mind? Considering that many facts unravelled during past 3 years it's only fair and reasonable and just as exactly as almost every vote party suggested beforehand that decision that was made should be revisited. I don't think it should be a stay/leave referendum but a deal(if any agreed)/WTO/stay one. If one presume it was democratic to allow people choice to stay or leave in 2016 then it's also very democratic to allow same people decide the terms on which said leave would happen or call it off altogether. Because if you want to argue that democracy ends on single referendum or vote let's just vote for government once in a generation for better or worse regardless of what happens later. Then of course if you want to be picky and anal why is it that elderly are allowed to decide the fate of the young population. It's not them that will have to live and work through that so why not make it that only people who have at least 10 years to retirement be allowed to vote or better yet let's complicate it more and devise a weight to a vote based on age with elderly having lowest and young highest because it's their fate is decided.
Similarly the argument let's get it done is absurd, it not ends at leaving as after you do, you will have to come back to the negotiating table to work out trade agreement as let's face it, EU as a whole is a biggest economy in the world...might move to second or third after UK leaves but it's still economy you will have to deal it whether you like it or not and as such there will be no end to the debate for years to come."That’s got to be the daftest argument for another vote (before the first one is implemented ) I’ve ever heard as if we voted to Remain in a 2nd vote all your arguments could be used by the losing side and we would be straight into a third referendum . The best example is the people who voted Remain have aged now and might vote Leave in another one ! Not leaving is simply undemocratic and is a coup that taking place under our noses by a a few hundred fanatic Remain MPs who are acting like a 5th column and the relentless 3 years of moaning by some triggered remainers has unfortunately condemned this country to decades of division regardless of what happens from now on . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People. Let me guess. You voted leave? Brexit means Brexit? No deal is a good deal? If you are feeling angry or betrayed or foolish then I am afraid you warned this would happen, do you remember ‘project fear’? You only have yourself to blame . Get over it You make a lot of assumptions indeed as you seek to shout down rational argument. I do (as a youngster!) recall the 1970s referendum. The ever increasing integration agenda of the then E.E.C (then a free trade zone only- nothing more) was well known to the government of the day - this agenda was NOT made known to the electorate in any way,shape, or form. They therefore cast their votes on an incomplete (to them) picture. Anecdoteally, I myself have never encountered anyone in my lifetime (now late fifties) that said they voted to remain in the E.E.C. in the seventies referendum. This may be of course be because I have only ever moved in working class circles. So how does exactly democracy works. Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. If one votes in general election do party that wins majority stays in power until they fully implement their plan for which you have voted for or are you given a chance to change your mind? Considering that many facts unravelled during past 3 years it's only fair and reasonable and just as exactly as almost every vote party suggested beforehand that decision that was made should be revisited. I don't think it should be a stay/leave referendum but a deal(if any agreed)/WTO/stay one. If one presume it was democratic to allow people choice to stay or leave in 2016 then it's also very democratic to allow same people decide the terms on which said leave would happen or call it off altogether. Because if you want to argue that democracy ends on single referendum or vote let's just vote for government once in a generation for better or worse regardless of what happens later. Then of course if you want to be picky and anal why is it that elderly are allowed to decide the fate of the young population. It's not them that will have to live and work through that so why not make it that only people who have at least 10 years to retirement be allowed to vote or better yet let's complicate it more and devise a weight to a vote based on age with elderly having lowest and young highest because it's their fate is decided.
Similarly the argument let's get it done is absurd, it not ends at leaving as after you do, you will have to come back to the negotiating table to work out trade agreement as let's face it, EU as a whole is a biggest economy in the world...might move to second or third after UK leaves but it's still economy you will have to deal it whether you like it or not and as such there will be no end to the debate for years to come.
That’s got to be the daftest argument for another vote (before the first one is implemented ) I’ve ever heard as if we voted to Remain in a 2nd vote all your arguments could be used by the losing side and we would be straight into a third referendum . The best example is the people who voted Remain have aged now and might vote Leave in another one !
Not leaving is simply undemocratic and is a coup that taking place under our noses by a a few hundred fanatic Remain MPs who are acting like a 5th column and the relentless 3 years of moaning by some triggered remainers has unfortunately condemned this country to decades of division regardless of what happens from now on ."So, your happy to leave the EU without a deal? Did you vote leave based on the information given at the time? Have things changed since? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People. Let me guess. You voted leave? Brexit means Brexit? No deal is a good deal? If you are feeling angry or betrayed or foolish then I am afraid you warned this would happen, do you remember ‘project fear’? You only have yourself to blame . Get over it You make a lot of assumptions indeed as you seek to shout down rational argument. I do (as a youngster!) recall the 1970s referendum. The ever increasing integration agenda of the then E.E.C (then a free trade zone only- nothing more) was well known to the government of the day - this agenda was NOT made known to the electorate in any way,shape, or form. They therefore cast their votes on an incomplete (to them) picture. Anecdoteally, I myself have never encountered anyone in my lifetime (now late fifties) that said they voted to remain in the E.E.C. in the seventies referendum. This may be of course be because I have only ever moved in working class circles. So how does exactly democracy works. Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. If one votes in general election do party that wins majority stays in power until they fully implement their plan for which you have voted for or are you given a chance to change your mind? Considering that many facts unravelled during past 3 years it's only fair and reasonable and just as exactly as almost every vote party suggested beforehand that decision that was made should be revisited. I don't think it should be a stay/leave referendum but a deal(if any agreed)/WTO/stay one. If one presume it was democratic to allow people choice to stay or leave in 2016 then it's also very democratic to allow same people decide the terms on which said leave would happen or call it off altogether. Because if you want to argue that democracy ends on single referendum or vote let's just vote for government once in a generation for better or worse regardless of what happens later. Then of course if you want to be picky and anal why is it that elderly are allowed to decide the fate of the young population. It's not them that will have to live and work through that so why not make it that only people who have at least 10 years to retirement be allowed to vote or better yet let's complicate it more and devise a weight to a vote based on age with elderly having lowest and young highest because it's their fate is decided.
Similarly the argument let's get it done is absurd, it not ends at leaving as after you do, you will have to come back to the negotiating table to work out trade agreement as let's face it, EU as a whole is a biggest economy in the world...might move to second or third after UK leaves but it's still economy you will have to deal it whether you like it or not and as such there will be no end to the debate for years to come.
That’s got to be the daftest argument for another vote (before the first one is implemented ) I’ve ever heard as if we voted to Remain in a 2nd vote all your arguments could be used by the losing side and we would be straight into a third referendum . The best example is the people who voted Remain have aged now and might vote Leave in another one !
Not leaving is simply undemocratic and is a coup that taking place under our noses by a a few hundred fanatic Remain MPs who are acting like a 5th column and the relentless 3 years of moaning by some triggered remainers has unfortunately condemned this country to decades of division regardless of what happens from now on ."So it’s undemocratic to have a change of mind about something, even if it was originally assumed that leaving would be easy and a good thing, but three years later it has become apparent that it will be anything but easy or a good thing at all? You think the democratic thing is just to plough on regardless and to hell with the consequences? Because that doesn’t sound democratic at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It would be a grave mistake to hold a second referendum with the result of the first still not having been implemented. A snap election should have been embraced by government AND opposition, as a chance to 'put their collective monies where their collective mouths are. Someone is running scared of The People. Let me guess. You voted leave? Brexit means Brexit? No deal is a good deal? If you are feeling angry or betrayed or foolish then I am afraid you warned this would happen, do you remember ‘project fear’? You only have yourself to blame . Get over it You make a lot of assumptions indeed as you seek to shout down rational argument. I do (as a youngster!) recall the 1970s referendum. The ever increasing integration agenda of the then E.E.C (then a free trade zone only- nothing more) was well known to the government of the day - this agenda was NOT made known to the electorate in any way,shape, or form. They therefore cast their votes on an incomplete (to them) picture. Anecdoteally, I myself have never encountered anyone in my lifetime (now late fifties) that said they voted to remain in the E.E.C. in the seventies referendum. This may be of course be because I have only ever moved in working class circles. So how does exactly democracy works. Putting aside it was advisory referendum do people are not allowed to change their mind. If one votes in general election do party that wins majority stays in power until they fully implement their plan for which you have voted for or are you given a chance to change your mind? Considering that many facts unravelled during past 3 years it's only fair and reasonable and just as exactly as almost every vote party suggested beforehand that decision that was made should be revisited. I don't think it should be a stay/leave referendum but a deal(if any agreed)/WTO/stay one. If one presume it was democratic to allow people choice to stay or leave in 2016 then it's also very democratic to allow same people decide the terms on which said leave would happen or call it off altogether. Because if you want to argue that democracy ends on single referendum or vote let's just vote for government once in a generation for better or worse regardless of what happens later. Then of course if you want to be picky and anal why is it that elderly are allowed to decide the fate of the young population. It's not them that will have to live and work through that so why not make it that only people who have at least 10 years to retirement be allowed to vote or better yet let's complicate it more and devise a weight to a vote based on age with elderly having lowest and young highest because it's their fate is decided.
Similarly the argument let's get it done is absurd, it not ends at leaving as after you do, you will have to come back to the negotiating table to work out trade agreement as let's face it, EU as a whole is a biggest economy in the world...might move to second or third after UK leaves but it's still economy you will have to deal it whether you like it or not and as such there will be no end to the debate for years to come.
That’s got to be the daftest argument for another vote (before the first one is implemented ) I’ve ever heard as if we voted to Remain in a 2nd vote all your arguments could be used by the losing side and we would be straight into a third referendum . The best example is the people who voted Remain have aged now and might vote Leave in another one !
Not leaving is simply undemocratic and is a coup that taking place under our noses by a a few hundred fanatic Remain MPs who are acting like a 5th column and the relentless 3 years of moaning by some triggered remainers has unfortunately condemned this country to decades of division regardless of what happens from now on .
So it’s undemocratic to have a change of mind about something, even if it was originally assumed that leaving would be easy and a good thing, but three years later it has become apparent that it will be anything but easy or a good thing at all?
You think the democratic thing is just to plough on regardless and to hell with the consequences?
Because that doesn’t sound democratic at all."Exactly . I don’t think some of the people who voted to leave understand democracy | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tbf I think a second vote will be even bigger leave but still don’t think remainers will accept it so don’t see the point " The point would be to draw a line under it all and get on with fucking the country | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tbf I think a second vote will be even bigger leave but still don’t think remainers will accept it so don’t see the point " How about a referendum based on a no deal or a deal (probably a re hash of TM) ?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People who voted to leave dont understand democracy has to take the prize as the best example of Orwellian Doublespeak ive heard since the vote. I think it must be a wind up by a Leaver " Try again. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tbf I think a second vote will be even bigger leave but still don’t think remainers will accept it so don’t see the point The point would be to draw a line under it all and get on with fucking the country "so then do we have two votes on a General election aswell how about best out of 3if that doesn’t work best out of 5 or just fuck the public off altogether like ppl say most are to fucking thick to know what’s best for them anyway maybe it’s best if you can only vote if you have a degree lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tbf I think a second vote will be even bigger leave but still don’t think remainers will accept it so don’t see the point How about a referendum based on a no deal or a deal (probably a re hash of TM) ??" Kinda pointless. We can 'no deal' out of the EU but we'll then need to negotiate a free trade deal with them anyway. The ideal referendum needs 3 options - soft Brexit, hard Brexit, and remain. The first two need to be fully defined and explained and plans in place for both. But that'd require a lot of work so I doubt we'll get that. It might just have to be May's deal vs remain. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tbf I think a second vote will be even bigger leave but still don’t think remainers will accept it so don’t see the point The point would be to draw a line under it all and get on with fucking the country so then do we have two votes on a General election aswell how about best out of 3if that doesn’t work best out of 5 or just fuck the public off altogether like ppl say most are to fucking thick to know what’s best for them anyway maybe it’s best if you can only vote if you have a degree lol
"No we don't. Because GEs are run in a totally different way. Being from the outset legally binding, with all sides laying out what they will or will not do. With the voting public having and understanding that they can hold them to the majority of their manifesto (where feasible). The in/out advisory referendum had none of the above, just name calling and extremely flaky "facts" and promises... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Imagine that the EU is a ship. And the ship is full of gold, that is partly yours. The ship is on fire, And the ship is going to be boarded by pirates.
What would you do.
1. Do you jump ship, leave, and help others to swim to the island. where you have a good chance of survival.
Or 2. Do you think of your own self interest and greed. Remain. try to take some gold with you. In the hope that you are not captured, r***d or murdered. by the pirates.
The pirate ship is called the Jolly rogered. Some of you might quite like that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tbf I think a second vote will be even bigger leave but still don’t think remainers will accept it so don’t see the point The point would be to draw a line under it all and get on with fucking the country so then do we have two votes on a General election aswell how about best out of 3if that doesn’t work best out of 5 or just fuck the public off altogether like ppl say most are to fucking thick to know what’s best for them anyway maybe it’s best if you can only vote if you have a degree lol"Can you honestly see a better way out of this shit show? I mean, how many families friends lovers etc fallen out over this bollocks and have we got any closer to a solution? Three years now feels like a lifetime away and the only simple democratic solution I can see is for there to be a second binding referendum to clear the air. Maybe leavers are afraid that the opinions of the public might have changed but that’s democracy so why not do it and we can all go back to enjoying life again! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tbf I think a second vote will be even bigger leave but still don’t think remainers will accept it so don’t see the point The point would be to draw a line under it all and get on with fucking the country so then do we have two votes on a General election aswell how about best out of 3if that doesn’t work best out of 5 or just fuck the public off altogether like ppl say most are to fucking thick to know what’s best for them anyway maybe it’s best if you can only vote if you have a degree lol
Can you honestly see a better way out of this shit show? I mean, how many families friends lovers etc fallen out over this bollocks and have we got any closer to a solution? Three years now feels like a lifetime away and the only simple democratic solution I can see is for there to be a second binding referendum to clear the air. Maybe leavers are afraid that the opinions of the public might have changed but that’s democracy so why not do it and we can all go back to enjoying life again! " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"and if peeps havent changed there minds we can start all the bollox of the last three years again.be honest peeps i know wethere they voted leave or remain none of them have changed there minds if anything there views on both sides are even more entrenched" Only one way to find out though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The perfect analogy is
Imagine that the EU is a ship. And the ship is full of gold, that is partly yours. The ship is on fire, And the ship is going to be boarded by pirates.
What would you do.
1. Do you jump ship, leave, and help others to swim to the island. where you have a good chance of survival.
Or 2. Do you think of your own self interest and greed. Remain. try to take some gold with you. In the hope that you are not captured, r***d or murdered. by the pirates.
The pirate ship is called the Jolly rogered. Some of you might quite like that. "So in this perfect analogy, who or what do the pirates represent? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tbf I think a second vote will be even bigger leave but still don’t think remainers will accept it so don’t see the point The point would be to draw a line under it all and get on with fucking the country so then do we have two votes on a General election aswell how about best out of 3if that doesn’t work best out of 5 or just fuck the public off altogether like ppl say most are to fucking thick to know what’s best for them anyway maybe it’s best if you can only vote if you have a degree lol
Can you honestly see a better way out of this shit show? I mean, how many families friends lovers etc fallen out over this bollocks and have we got any closer to a solution? Three years now feels like a lifetime away and the only simple democratic solution I can see is for there to be a second binding referendum to clear the air. Maybe leavers are afraid that the opinions of the public might have changed but that’s democracy so why not do it and we can all go back to enjoying life again! "So your brilliant solution to this ‘shit show’ as you describe it is to have another vote ! Do you seriously think the losing side in another vote will accept the result ? Remoaners like yourself who haven’t stopped moaning away for 3 years solid have now set a precedent ie keep moaning and whinging and you can overturn the biggest democratic exercise this country has ever witnessed ( 34m people voted ) You yourself are personally responsible for this situation because you are still moaning away ie you are responsible for families and lovers falling out just as you have described . Well done . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and reason why maybe, just maybe, there should be another vote. “I’m not saying there wasn’t a democratic mandate for Brexit at the time. I’m just saying if I narrowly decided to order fish at a restaurant that was known for chicken, but said it was happy to offer fish, and so far I’ve been waiting three hours, and two chefs who promised to cook the fish had quit, and the third one is promising to deliver the fish in the next five minutes whether it’s cooked or not, or indeed still alive, and all the waiting staff have spent the last few hours arguing amongst themselves about whether I wanted battered cod, grilled salmon, jellied eels or dolphin kebabs, and if large parts of the restaurant appeared to be on fire but no-one was paying attention to it because they were all arguing about fish, I would quite like, just once, to be asked if I definitely still wanted the fish.”" I’ve always been against another referendum but you have just put the best argument forward for having another I’ve heard ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tbf I think a second vote will be even bigger leave but still don’t think remainers will accept it so don’t see the point The point would be to draw a line under it all and get on with fucking the country so then do we have two votes on a General election aswell how about best out of 3if that doesn’t work best out of 5 or just fuck the public off altogether like ppl say most are to fucking thick to know what’s best for them anyway maybe it’s best if you can only vote if you have a degree lol
Can you honestly see a better way out of this shit show? I mean, how many families friends lovers etc fallen out over this bollocks and have we got any closer to a solution? Three years now feels like a lifetime away and the only simple democratic solution I can see is for there to be a second binding referendum to clear the air. Maybe leavers are afraid that the opinions of the public might have changed but that’s democracy so why not do it and we can all go back to enjoying life again!
So your brilliant solution to this ‘shit show’ as you describe it is to have another vote ! Do you seriously think the losing side in another vote will accept the result ? Remoaners like yourself who haven’t stopped moaning away for 3 years solid have now set a precedent ie keep moaning and whinging and you can overturn the biggest democratic exercise this country has ever witnessed ( 34m people voted )
You yourself are personally responsible for this situation because you are still moaning away ie you are responsible for families and lovers falling out just as you have described . Well done ."Hmm....interesting how dogmatic one can be when presented with a simple solution. I think your concept of moaning is actually my democratic right to protest against this shit show. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tbf I think a second vote will be even bigger leave but still don’t think remainers will accept it so don’t see the point The point would be to draw a line under it all and get on with fucking the country so then do we have two votes on a General election aswell how about best out of 3if that doesn’t work best out of 5 or just fuck the public off altogether like ppl say most are to fucking thick to know what’s best for them anyway maybe it’s best if you can only vote if you have a degree lol
Can you honestly see a better way out of this shit show? I mean, how many families friends lovers etc fallen out over this bollocks and have we got any closer to a solution? Three years now feels like a lifetime away and the only simple democratic solution I can see is for there to be a second binding referendum to clear the air. Maybe leavers are afraid that the opinions of the public might have changed but that’s democracy so why not do it and we can all go back to enjoying life again!
So your brilliant solution to this ‘shit show’ as you describe it is to have another vote ! Do you seriously think the losing side in another vote will accept the result ? Remoaners like yourself who haven’t stopped moaning away for 3 years solid have now set a precedent ie keep moaning and whinging and you can overturn the biggest democratic exercise this country has ever witnessed ( 34m people voted )
You yourself are personally responsible for this situation because you are still moaning away ie you are responsible for families and lovers falling out just as you have described . Well done ."Can we agree with one thing at least? That this “remoaner” BS is just utter hypocrisy, given that the other side of the debate has been professionally moaning about the EU for over 40 years? That aside, the difference between the two sides is that one spent time moaning about stuff that often had little basis in reality, and the other is often moaning a little more constructively about the almost certain damage to the economy a particular course of action is likely to cause. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
