UK voters should make final Brexit decision if talks with EU collapse: poll

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Grouse said:

You join the clubs you wish! That's freedom!

 

I am surprised that someone with your intellect would support such a movement without qualification?

These brexiteer or Ruskie trolls, are so keen to play the role of "I'm a weak girl, you must help me!!"

 

I just wish they would grow a pair and start acting like men. Broad wish, I know. 

 

Would it be too much to ask for our Brexitter Russian trolls to behave like a man?

Edited November 11, 2018 by Guest

[vogie]

13 minutes ago, Grouse said:

You join the clubs you wish! That's freedom!

 

I am surprised that someone with your intellect would support such a movement without qualification?

Intellect, I'll have you know my IQ came back negative.????

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

I’ll take that as meaning you don’t really have much of an idea.

 

I guess that would be your take. 

 

Why an earth did the Russian co-operation with the Western people, turned out to be bad once again? We are the same people after all. We should be working together, solving problems together. 

[dunroaming]

1 hour ago, My Thai Life said:

I'm sure many people share these concerns.

 

But they seem to forget that "no deal" is not an end-point in itself; it's a beginning. It would be the fastest way for the UK to get to the point of finalising trade deals with non-EU countries, and probably with the EU too. It would also save the UK a huge amount of money which would more than offset the short-term disruption.

 

 

Well it has been stated that with a no deal we still pay north of £21 billion.  I wish I had your optimism over a no deal scenario but all the voices seem to be saying it will be a catastrophic for the country.  If not then why wouldn't May just go with it?

[vogie]

10 minutes ago, oilinki said:

I guess that would be your take. 

 

Why an earth did the Russian co-operation with the Western people, turned out to be bad once again? We are the same people after all. We should be working together, solving problems together. 

"We are the same people after all. We should be working together, solving problems together."

 

Are you quoting Bob Geldof now?

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

They are til mid december or 01 Feb if short sighted (Partridge!) ????

I'm always in season. <removed> ????

[Patriot1066]

4 minutes ago, vogie said:

"We are the same people after all. We should be working together, solving problems together."

 

Are you quoting Bob Geldof now?

It’s not been good since the revolution, the war we clubbed in with them but with no trust. And after the war well that’s easy to see.

[mogandave]

I guess that would be your take. 
 
Why an earth did the Russian co-operation with the Western people, turned out to be bad once again? We are the same people after all. We should be working together, solving problems together. 

I’ll take that as you doubling down...

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

 

Why?

 

How long have you got?

 

Lets start with:

 

1) economically ruinous

 

2) further erodes civil society and social justice

 

3) limits freedom of movement for U.K. Specialists and retirees

 

4) It makes us a laughing stock or worse in the eyes of the world

 

5) I say so

[mogandave]

Well it has been stated that with a no deal we still pay north of £21 billion.  I wish I had your optimism over a no deal scenario but all the voices seem to be saying it will be a catastrophic for the country.  If not then why wouldn't May just go with it?

Surly not all the voices are saying that.

[Grouse]

55 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Labour MP first to be sued for 'laziness'

A Labour MP has become the first to be sued for negligence by a constituent.

Legal experts say the case, which is being heard at Brentford County Court, is the first of an MP facing action for breaching their "duty of care" to a constituent.

While MPs have no statutory obligation to voters, the Commons code of conduct says they have a "general duty to act in the interests of the nation as a whole and a special duty to their constituents".

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/4509276/Labour-MP-first-to-be-sued-for-laziness.html

And what has that to do with my point?

 

The case you quote will fail due to parliamentary privilege 

[Patriot1066]

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

How long have you got?

 

Lets start with:

 

1) economically ruinous

 

2) further erodes civil society and social justice

 

3) limits freedom of movement for U.K. Specialists and retirees

 

4) It makes us a laughing stock or worse in the eyes of the world

 

5) I say so

Is it not ruinous to be in a club with little financial control or accountability.

 

People have been ritiring to Europe long be for the EU do you think they will kick everyone out or stop new?

 

Is being in their puny army safe for us as only us and France have real military capabillity. Is it ruinous we shoulder a bigger part of defence than the Germans.

 

is it ruinous when their heads of state insult our biggest military ally accusing them of been a threat at a time of remembrance when they rescued Europe.

 

No my friend the EU will ruin us all!

[Patriot1066]

11 minutes ago, Grouse said:

And what has that to do with my point?

 

The case you quote will fail due to parliamentary privilege 

Yes it will .

[mogandave]

How long have you got?
 
Lets start with:
 
1) economically ruinous
 
2) further erodes civil society and social justice
 
3) limits freedom of movement for U.K. Specialists and retirees
 
4) It makes us a laughing stock or worse in the eyes of the world
 
5) I say so

I’ve got plenty of time.

All but number 3 are conjecture, and everyone knew about 3 going in.

That’s all you have, really?

[Stupooey]

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

You seriously think 16 year olds have the knowledge and experience to vote intelligently??!

 

Remainers will have the opportunity to vote for a party that promises to rejoin the eu at the next GE.  I don't think anyone is saying that they will never have this opportunity.

 

I think you're missing the point insofar as GE's only ever result in a minority voting for the party that wins the election!  Even so, everyone abides by the result - and doesn't start campaigning to reverse the election result.....

 

It was the House of Lords that proposed lowering the voting age to 16 for the Referendum, so they clearly thought they were responsible enough; after all, they are allowed to marry, so are considered capable of making decisions that will affect the rest of their lives. I posed the question earlier, who had more right to determine the long-term future of the country, a 17 year old or a 97 year old, but received no reply. I wonder why not.

Leaving and rejoining would mean that things had really gone belly-up, not worth contemplating. Much better not to leave at all, especially if the electorate of the time (2019) don't want it.

Regarding general elections, I think you are missing the point. A difference of 4% in the vote for the two major parties would usually result in a hung parliament, which would quickly be followed by another election, as for example in 1974.

 

[Stupooey]

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Whereas some of us have been following the NUMEROUS threads on this topic since shortly before the referendum!

 

Feel free to call me a liar ☹️, but I can assure you that remainers have posted similar 'clips', showing the leavers interviewed as stupid.

 

 

I was just referring to this thread. I have been involved in some, but certainly not all, of the other Brexit threads, so I cannot comment on them.

[adammike]

3 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

Your geography seems confused. There will never be a land border between Ireland and the EU unless Ireland leaves the EU and the UK re-enters.

 

The Common Travel Area pre-dates the EU, and it will post-date the UK's exit from the EU. I have confirmed this at least 5 times on this thread.

 

For personal travel exactly the same provision will be in force between the UK and Ireland post-Brexit as has existed since 1923 (apart from WWII when it was suspended). This is a fact, which no-one on this forum or any other is confused about except you and Oilinki. I suggest you do some simple research on this before you embarrass yourself further.

 

In addition to which it's clear that you have never travelled between Ireland and the UK. I wonder if you have ever even visited either.

 

 

 

 

The land border will be between the the republic and northern Ireland,the fact that there is free travel between England and the republic is not the point nobody expects that to change post brexit, the point is how is the border going to be policed? Post brexit everybody and everything that flows over the land border through the ports and airports will have to be controlled.By the way I am in the process of registering as an Irish citizen of foreign birth so less of the insults.P.S. born and raised in England of English parents one Irish grandmother.

 

Edited November 11, 2018 by adammike
Addition

[Patriot1066]

4 minutes ago, Stupooey said:

I was just referring to this thread. I have been involved in some, but certainly not all, of the other Brexit threads, so I cannot comment on them.

Who said remainers are stupid. Where is your evidence most hate seems to come from the left and remain sniggering comments dog whistle comments!

[mogandave]

 

It was the House of Lords that proposed lowering the voting age to 16 for the Referendum, so they clearly thought they were responsible enough; after all, they are allowed to marry, so are considered capable of making decisions that will affect the rest of their lives. I posed the question earlier, who had more right to determine the long-term future of the country, a 17 year old or a 97 year old, but received no reply. I wonder why not.

Leaving and rejoining would mean that things had really gone belly-up, not worth contemplating. Much better not to leave at all, especially if the electorate of the time (2019) don't want it.

Regarding general elections, I think you are missing the point. A difference of 4% in the vote for the two major parties would usually result in a hung parliament, which would quickly be followed by another election, as for example in 1974.

 

 

The same side always wants kids to vote.

 

In the US they want illegal aliens and convicted felons to vote as well. That’s why they’re weak on crime and want open boarders.

 

Do you really think it is because they want well informed, conscientious people voting?

 

I think not...

[Patriot1066]

18 minutes ago, Stupooey said:

 

It was the House of Lords that proposed lowering the voting age to 16 for the Referendum, so they clearly thought they were responsible enough; after all, they are allowed to marry, so are considered capable of making decisions that will affect the rest of their lives. I posed the question earlier, who had more right to determine the long-term future of the country, a 17 year old or a 97 year old, but received no reply. I wonder why not.

Leaving and rejoining would mean that things had really gone belly-up, not worth contemplating. Much better not to leave at all, especially if the electorate of the time (2019) don't want it.

Regarding general elections, I think you are missing the point. A difference of 4% in the vote for the two major parties would usually result in a hung parliament, which would quickly be followed by another election, as for example in 1974.

 

The issue with 16 year olds voting is the poor ones won’t, the rich liberals probably will, but the big issue is the torrent of pro EU stuff the left wing teachers make them digest.

 

How can they be objective after 12 years of pro left pro EU brainwashing?

[My Thai Life]

33 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Well it has been stated that with a no deal we still pay north of £21 billion.  I wish I had your optimism over a no deal scenario but all the voices seem to be saying it will be a catastrophic for the country.  If not then why wouldn't May just go with it?

About the financials - there are 2 components - the settlement and the ongoing costs: with no deal there would likely still be some settlement, the amount unconfirmed, though some people say zero; but the ongoing costs would be very much lower, most likely zero, as we would no longer be in the CU and single market. 

 

You say "all the voices", but that depends on what voices you listen to. I read a broad cross section of mainstream news and opinion from reputable news sources every day, and there are many different opinions, just as there are in Parliament. The alternative to no deal is currently described as "vassalage"  or akin to Dante's first ring of hell. I did read Dante's Divine Comedy many moons ago and I seem to remember the first ring of hell is limbo ????

 

Re May. Well May is a remainer, but she has often said "no deal is better than a bad deal". And the overwhelming opinion of leave and remain seems to be that Chequers is not just bad but unacceptable to both Parliament and to the EU. Why is she doing it? The most likely explanation that I have read is that she made a promise to some Japanese executives in the car industry about frictionless trade, but I'm sure there are many factors.

 

If it's a choice between (1) a very expensive long-term limbo-like vassalage and (2) no deal as the fastest route to independent free trade and exit from the ECJ, then I can see why Leavers prefer no deal.

[vinny41]

37 minutes ago, Grouse said:

And what has that to do with my point?

 

The case you quote will fail due to parliamentary privilege 

It means all things all possible I will be enjoying a beer when the remainers think they have the battle in the bag until the supreme court overturns and voids any vote to remain

[Guest]

52 minutes ago, vogie said:

"We are the same people after all. We should be working together, solving problems together."

 

Are you quoting Bob Geldof now?

I can't ask Ruskies to do a decent thing, can I?

[vogie]

2 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

About the financials - there are 2 components - the settlement and the ongoing costs: with no deal there would likely still be some settlement, the amount unconfirmed, though some people say zero; but the ongoing costs would be very much lower, most likely zero, as we would no longer be in the CU and single market. 

 

You say "all the voices", but that depends on what voices you listen to. I read a broad cross section of mainstream news and opinion from reputable news sources every day, and there are many different opinions, just as there are in Parliament. The alternative to no deal is currently described as "vassalage"  or akin to Dante's first ring of hell. I did read Dante's Divine Comedy many moons ago and I seem to remember the first ring of hell is limbo ????

 

Re May. Well May is a remainer, but she has often said "no deal is better than a bad deal". And the overwhelming opinion of leave and remain seems to be that Chequers is not just bad but unacceptable to both Parliament and to the EU. Why is she doing it? The most likely explanation that I have read is that she made a promise to some Japanese executives in the car industry about frictionless trade, but I'm sure there are many factors.

 

If it's a choice between (1) a very expensive long-term limbo-like vassalage and (2) no deal as the fastest route to independent free trade and exit from the ECJ, then I can see why Leavers prefer no deal.

I did watch PMQs when Jeremy Corbyn did ask PM May if the divorce money would still be paid in the event of a no deal, the PM said it would. 

[vogie]

2 minutes ago, oilinki said:

I can't ask Ruskies to do a decent thing, can I?

I don't know what you are talking about, however I will play along with you. 

 

Why not?

[Stupooey]

3 hours ago, vogie said:

Many of the clips and or memes, whatever you want to call them, have been removed. At one time we were likened to Nazis because we chose to leave, do you remember those offensive material? Maybe you have a selective memory, I don't know.

The only term I can think of that you might be on about that would offend, certainly a leaver, was being referred to as a Quitling, in all honesty would that terminology offend you if the shoe was on the other foot? Quite a difference between remoaner and a quitling I think.

 

 

 

Quite early on in the thread I quoted from an article which set out the disadvantages of absolute sovereignty. One responder asked me to post the whole article in full, which I did. One point the author made was that Hitler and Stalin would not have been able to operate the way they did without absolute sovereignty. Purely as a result of this, I was accused of equating Leavers with Nazis. This type of non-sequitur has been a recurring feature in, particularly, Leaver responses - a case of over-sensitivity I think. Quitling was probably a knee-jerk reaction to that, I would have just ignored it and moved on.

[My Thai Life]

13 minutes ago, adammike said:

The land border will be between the the republic and northern Ireland,the fact that there is free travel between England and the republic is not the point nobody expects that to change post brexit, the point is how is the border going to be policed? Post brexit everybody and everything that flows over the land border through the ports and airports will have to be controlled.By the way I am in the process of registering as an Irish citizen of foreign birth so less of the insults.P.S. born and raised in England of English parents one Irish grandmother.

Your original point was about travel and freedom of movement. Now you are acknowledging that I am correct and attempting to change the goalposts completely.

 

Yes of course UK-NI trade will need to be managed in a different way. I have made many posts with quotes and links about this in the past 2 months or so. I'm not going to repeat them for you.

 

Re insults, you should check your posts to me. I don't reply to people who insult me in an attempt to conceal their ignorance, and I won't be replying to you again.

 

Good luck with your Irish citizenship application. I'm sure the Irish will be able to educate you about the  Common Travel Area.

[damascase]

2 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

I'm sure many people share these concerns.

 

But they seem to forget that "no deal" is not an end-point in itself; it's a beginning. It would be the fastest way for the UK to get to the point of finalising trade deals with non-EU countries, and probably with the EU too. It would also save the UK a huge amount of money which would more than offset the short-term disruption.

 

 

‘Finalising trade deals’ sounds a tad optimistic as negotiations cannot start before Brexit-day. Trade deals often take years of hard work and often complicated negotiations before getting to the ‘finalising’ stage.

[vogie]

1 minute ago, Stupooey said:

Quite early on in the thread I quoted from an article which set out the disadvantages of absolute sovereignty. One responder asked me to post the whole article in full, which I did. One point the author made was that Hitler and Stalin would not have been able to operate the way they did without absolute sovereignty. Purely as a result of this, I was accused of equating Leavers with Nazis. This type of non-sequitur has been a recurring feature in, particularly, Leaver responses - a case of over-sensitivity I think. Quitling was probably a knee-jerk reaction to that, I would have just ignored it and moved on.

You can rest comfortable in your bed tonight knowing that it had nothing to do with what you posted. Quitling was not a knee jerk reaction and knowing that the poster meant Quisling, who was a traitor and more is deeply offensive, so away you go with your spin.

[My Thai Life]

Just now, damascase said:

‘Finalising trade deals’ sounds a tad optimistic as negotiations cannot start before Brexit-day. Trade deals often take years of hard work and often complicated negotiations before getting to the ‘finalising’ stage.

Absolutely, but of course you get to the end sooner by starting sooner, which no deal would allow us to do.