Jump to content

Public support for new Brexit referendum revealed


Recommended Posts

Posted
53 minutes ago, Harveyboy said:

Have to go back in our knees.. they'd love it

And we would have to join the Euro.  If Tony Blair had followed Gordon Brown's advice and we'd joined the Euro back then, none of this would have happened.  Sure, Labour would have suffered politically at the time due to the UKIP and other nationalists, but it would have blown over and now we'd be seeing the benefits.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Posted
41 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

And we would have to join the Euro.  If Tony Blair had followed Gordon Brown's advice and we'd joined the Euro back then, none of this would have happened.  Sure, Labour would have suffered politically at the time due to the UKIP and other nationalists, but it would have blown over and now we'd be seeing the benefits.

Bullshine.

Posted
5 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

And we would have to join the Euro.  If Tony Blair had followed Gordon Brown's advice and we'd joined the Euro back then, none of this would have happened.  Sure, Labour would have suffered politically at the time due to the UKIP and other nationalists, but it would have blown over and now we'd be seeing the benefits.

Actually Blair was in favour of joining the Euro and Brown was against.

 

An alternative scenario of what might have happened if we had joined.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/economics-blog/2013/jun/02/britain-euro-what-if-joined

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
1 hour ago, MrMojoRisin said:

Being Australian, I must say, I have thoroughly enjoyed the Brexit fiasco and do hope the nonsense continues on for many many years to come.

IMG_4179.jpeg.48be5c3aeadbc2d361afbe0111d72b79.jpeg

Can’t see you clowns regaining the Ashes any time soon either.

????????????

Funnily enough. I can't see you jesters making a world football final or winning a cricket Test series in England anytime soon either.

  • Haha 1
Posted
4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

What a biased presentation in this article.

Two graphs below. One willfully omitting the Eurozone from the linked article, and the other with the Eurozone GDP forecast. The growth forecast for UK is less than half of the GDP growth forecast in the Eurozone (which includes the weight of the bad performance of Germany).

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn02784/

1693412222538.jpg

66fe95bb-22b7-4b16-940a-043761fb4794.png

  • Like 1
Posted
45 minutes ago, candide said:

What a biased presentation in this article.

Two graphs below. One willfully omitting the Eurozone from the linked article, and the other with the Eurozone GDP forecast. The growth forecast for UK is less than half of the GDP growth forecast in the Eurozone (which includes the weight of the bad performance of Germany).

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn02784/

1693412222538.jpg

66fe95bb-22b7-4b16-940a-043761fb4794.png

And all the recent forecasts by IMF with regards to economic growth have been spot on, haven't they?????????????


 

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, youreavinalaff said:

And all the recent forecasts by IMF with regards to economic growth have been spot on, haven't they?????????????


 

Haven't you noticed it's exactly the same numbers as in the article JonnyF proudly linked, plus the Eurozone numbers? ????????????????????

Edited by candide
  • Like 1
Posted
50 minutes ago, candide said:

Haven't you noticed it's exactly the same numbers as in the article JonnyF proudly linked, plus the Eurozone numbers? ????????????????????

Seeing as the source was the same, it would make sense the figures were the same. Doesn't make it any more accurate.

 

I don't see the point you are trying to make.

Posted
4 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

And all the recent forecasts by IMF with regards to economic growth have been spot on, haven't they?????????????


 

His point he makes is relevant information is missing from the Toryograph report. 

Posted
12 hours ago, JonnyF said:

The EU is done. Put a fork in it.

 

Hahahaha . . . ???????? ????????

 

7 hours ago, candide said:

What a biased presentation in this article.

 

It's all they have . . . luckily the UK is blazing new horizons with economic growth and general happiness

  • Like 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Sing_Sling said:

Ah, a typo gets you all wondrous.  ????. Small minds and all that

Not really, small minds don't check before they post or have a spell checker. ???? 

Posted
53 minutes ago, transam said:

Not really, small minds don't check before they post or have a spell checker. ???? 

Or only the analy retentive get all bothered by a typo. ????

Posted
On 8/14/2023 at 11:38 PM, vinny41 said:

 By contrast, only 8% of Leave voters support a referendum in 2023, 16% think there should be one in the next five years, and 20% within the next ten years

 

I haven't seen anything from the EU that indicates it wants the UK back in the EU fold and on what terms

I'd say 50 percent of leave voters will be daed or very near it in the next 10 years.

 

And it is all very academic. As you say, who says that a return is even an option at this point. The UK is hardly negotiating from a position of strength at his point.

Posted
4 minutes ago, n00dle said:

I'd say 50 percent of leave voters will be daed or very near it in the next 10 years.

 

And it is all very academic. As you say, who says that a return is even an option at this point. The UK is hardly negotiating from a position of strength at his point.

It might be more than 50% if they ever need to urgently get into hospital or see a doctor.

 

The ‘winter NHS crisis’ is already off to an early start.

 

‘350,000,000 per week, let’s give that to the NHS’

 

Or stuff it in the pockets of Ministerial Cronies?!

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, candide said:

Haven't you noticed it's exactly the same numbers as in the article JonnyF proudly linked, plus the Eurozone numbers? ????????????????????

My point is that JonnyF's claim was based on a biased article, in which a key number from the IMF comparison had been deleted. The missing number is showing the opposite of his claim..

Edited by candide
  • Confused 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

His point he makes is relevant information is missing from the Toryograph report. 

I was talking about IMF forecasts.

Edited by youreavinalaff
Posted
2 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

I was talking about IMF.

 

He said nothing about missing information.

 

I'll wait for him to answer the question, as apposed to relyinging on unsubstantiated efforts at mind reading.

He just did:

 

24 minutes ago, candide said:

My point is that JonnyF's claim was based on a biased article, in which a key number from the IMF comparison had been deleted. The missing number is showing the opposite of his claim..

 

Posted
23 minutes ago, candide said:

My point is that JonnyF claim was based on a biased article, in which a key number from the IMF comparison had been deleted. The missing number is showing the opposite of his claim..

 

You've already pointed out the IMF forecasts on both comments are " exactly" the same.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
1 minute ago, youreavinalaff said:

I was talking about IMF.

 

He said nothing about missing information.

 

I'll wait for him to answer the question, as apposed to relyinging on unsubstantiated efforts at mind reading.

Yet my post, to which you decided to reply, is about missing information.

No mind reading, article reading.

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
Just now, candide said:

Yet my post, to which you decided to reply, is about missing information.

No mind reading, article reading.

 

Yet my post was about IMF forecasts. No particular one. IMF forecasts in general.

 

I made no point on which ones, involving which countries or what forecasts. You took exception. 

 

Why?

 

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Yet my post was about IMF forecasts. No particular one. IMF forecasts in general.

 

I made no point on which ones, involving which countries or what forecasts. You took exception. 

 

Why?

 

Ok, so let's update my comment!

The telegraph article is misleading, as it omits to show the Eurozone GDP forecast, which is more than twice higher than the UK forecast.

It should also be mentioned that another poster (youreavinalaff), thinks that  the IMF numbers on which this article is based may not be reliable.

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, candide said:

Ok, so let's update my comment!

The telegraph article is misleading, as it omits to show the Eurozone GDP forecast, which is more than twice higher than the UK forecast.

It should also be mentioned that another poster (youreavinalaff), thinks that  the IMF numbers on which this article is based may not be reliable.

 

Why are you quoting me and taking about me in the third person?

 

Seems your passion for IMF forecasts is getting to you. ????????????

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...