From London, with love: tens of thousands rally against Brexit vote

[SgtRock]

He asked for parameters to be put in place, as has been pointed out to you. Those parameters would potentially have worked for / against both camps, but it would have stopped the garbage that is going on now with demands for 2nd referendums.

It may well be that he thought he was going to be on the losing side, that does not make him wrong

This was pointed out by teatree. which in turn had you asking what drugs he was on. Pretty childish and certainly uncalled for.

People will word things to sound balanced in isolation of other elements even when the reason WHY they are doing it is out of bias and not getting their way. I can word anything to make it sound like I am only being fair even if I say something completely asinine and motivated out of bias.

When was it created, what was the motivation are as important - sometimes more important than what is written.

His motivation was the vote was not going his way.

It is the same logic that gets into a loop of 1 out of 1, 2 out of 3, 3 out of 5, 5 out of 7.... etc. It is an attempt to move the goalposts which in this case he moved in the wrong direct in hindsight.

The fact of the matter is. He started a petition to have parameters put in place, which was actually a sensible petition. This petition grew no legs and got nowhere.

It has now been hijacked by sore losers, who could have jumped on it straight away and assisted in getting those parameters put in place.

No, the wailing, gnashing remainers thought victory was assured. Done nothing and are now crying and stamping their little feet like spoiled little children that have just had their ice cream nicked.

[nontabury]

No. England were beaten by Iceland.

Wales beat Belgium.

An appalling performance by England, a magnificent team effort by Wales.

Back to the topic.

Well first as an English man, I am British too so I will be routing for Wales...

And I wish Iceland well too, as they knocked us out it would be just more egg on the face of the English team if Iceland were well and truly thrashed by France.

Are the remainers after another referendum or a re-match?

Edited July 4, 2016 by nontabury

[SgtRock]

I mean if I believed in segregation, I could write something like:

In order to be racially fair and to ensure ensure the same percentage of blacks are allocated seats on public transit that based on local census data that the there will be a that portion of seating reserved for people who are not white, and the rest of the bus will be reserved for the rest of the people (white). This will ensure that black people are not discriminated against.

Woo wooo! see that I was only looking out for the best of everyone..... not out of racism... that would be bad...

Allocating seating based on colour is the very definition of racism.

I am now swiftly coming to the conclusion that you are nothing but a troll.

[bkkcanuck8]

He asked for parameters to be put in place, as has been pointed out to you. Those parameters would potentially have worked for / against both camps, but it would have stopped the garbage that is going on now with demands for 2nd referendums.

It may well be that he thought he was going to be on the losing side, that does not make him wrong

This was pointed out by teatree. which in turn had you asking what drugs he was on. Pretty childish and certainly uncalled for.

People will word things to sound balanced in isolation of other elements even when the reason WHY they are doing it is out of bias and not getting their way. I can word anything to make it sound like I am only being fair even if I say something completely asinine and motivated out of bias.

When was it created, what was the motivation are as important - sometimes more important than what is written.

His motivation was the vote was not going his way.

It is the same logic that gets into a loop of 1 out of 1, 2 out of 3, 3 out of 5, 5 out of 7.... etc. It is an attempt to move the goalposts which in this case he moved in the wrong direct in hindsight.

The fact of the matter is. He started a petition to have parameters put in place, which was actually a sensible petition. This petition grew no legs and got nowhere.

It has now been hijacked by sore losers, who could have jumped on it straight away and assisted in getting those parameters put in place.

No, the wailing, gnashing remainers thought victory was assured. Done nothing and are now crying and stamping their little feet like spoiled little children that have just had their ice cream nicked.

No, that is not the fact of the matter. Why would his first words be that a petition he started was being "hijacked" by remainers??? If it is all about the parameters, then it is neutral and anything furthering those parameters would not constitute "hijacking"....

[Skywalker69]

We voted leave ...but we were only joking.

I voted remain, but I accept the result now let get on with it and make the best of a bad decision.

Lets show most of those other countries in the EU who are unhappy with it there is another alternative, maybe in a few years there will be a new European Union based on what was good with the present EU and leaving out the bad.

Why on earth would you believe that? Because you believe the propaganda promulgated by the UK media....

Always best to make up your own mind - regardless of media propaganda.

How does one make up ones mind if one dosn´t read or listen to any form of media?

[Skywalker69]

Yes, until a result which is in the best interests of the people is reached

Please explain just who do YOU think should decide what is in the best interests of the people?

You, me, politicians, any political party, the Queen or the Royal Family, the EU, France, Germany, Mickey Mouse?

If you claim that the people of the UK should decide, it may have escaped your notice that 51.8% of the people who ACTUALLY could be bothered to vote which was over 17 million people actually voted for a Brexit.

I was one of them.

From the tone of your posts you voted to stay.

Your side lost.

My side won.

A simple question for you.

If your side had won and my side had lost would you STILL have wanted another referendum?

So you genuinely believe that if Brexit had narrowly lost, the likes of UKIP would have just accepted it and not continued to campaign and push for another vote? Dream on!

I just want what is best for the UK and for future generations.

You still haven't answered my question.

A simple question for you.

If your side had won and my side had lost would you STILL have wanted another referendum?

I don't know about anybody else but I would have accepted it.

What is a narrow loss?

10,000, 50,000, 100,000 votes? 1 or 2%?

It was over 1,000,000 votes and 3.8%.

quote "I just want what is best for the UK and for future generations."

Do you not think that I and many others who voted Brexit want the same thing?

How do YOU know what is best for the UK and future generations?

Are you omnipotent, do you have a crystal ball, use tarot cards?

Remember that time Nigel Farage said 52-48 votes should lead to second referendum?

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/remember-that-time-nigel-farage-said-52-48-votes-should-lead-to-second-referendum-5963900/

[bkkcanuck8]

I mean if I believed in segregation, I could write something like:

In order to be racially fair and to ensure ensure the same percentage of blacks are allocated seats on public transit that based on local census data that the there will be a that portion of seating reserved for people who are not white, and the rest of the bus will be reserved for the rest of the people (white). This will ensure that black people are not discriminated against.

Woo wooo! see that I was only looking out for the best of everyone..... not out of racism... that would be bad...

Allocating seating based on colour is the very definition of racism.

I am now swiftly coming to the conclusion that you are nothing but a troll.

Yes, but in the modern socialist nation - there is good racism and bad racism..... good racism is called affirmative action and bad racism is well... just racism.... so we will call this act the "Bus Affirmative Action Act" or Baaa for short

[bkkcanuck8]

Not to mention - no where in the question did I say anything about racism -- it was about ensuring fair access to seats on public transit by those that are disadvantaged.... It was written fairly, it sounded fairly, and if you say motivation does not matter... then it definitely sounds like a good idea.... we do that at certain Universities and everyone that is disadvantaged are happy with it... (only the Chinese are unhappy because merit was discounted).

[nontabury]

We voted leave ...but we were only joking.

I voted remain, but I accept the result now let get on with it and make the best of a bad decision.

Lets show most of those other countries in the EU who are unhappy with it there is another alternative, maybe in a few years there will be a new European Union based on what was good with the present EU and leaving out the bad.

Why on earth would you believe that? Because you believe the propaganda promulgated by the UK media....

Always best to make up your own mind - regardless of media propaganda.

How does one make up ones mind if one dosn´t read or listen to any form of media?

That's fair enough,as long as you know who owns the media.

[Khun Han]

We voted leave ...but we were only joking.

I voted remain, but I accept the result now let get on with it and make the best of a bad decision.

Lets show most of those other countries in the EU who are unhappy with it there is another alternative, maybe in a few years there will be a new European Union based on what was good with the present EU and leaving out the bad.

Why on earth would you believe that? Because you believe the propaganda promulgated by the UK media....

Always best to make up your own mind - regardless of media propaganda.

How does one make up ones mind if one dosn´t read or listen to any form of media?

That's fair enough,as long as you know who owns the media.

Talking of which, Blair's now been rolled out to support 'Stay'. Desperation stakes.

[Kwasaki]

This guy has a lot of interviews with the protesters on his YouTube channel. Interesting to get a 1st hand perspective.

I like the bit where she says to the lady " you should respect us and leave ".

[Thaiwine]

So you genuinely believe that if Brexit had narrowly lost, the likes of UKIP would have just accepted it and not continued to campaign and push for another vote? Dream on!

I just want what is best for the UK and for future generations.

You still haven't answered my question.

A simple question for you.

If your side had won and my side had lost would you STILL have wanted another referendum?

I don't know about anybody else but I would have accepted it.

What is a narrow loss?

10,000, 50,000, 100,000 votes? 1 or 2%?

It was over 1,000,000 votes and 3.8%.

quote "I just want what is best for the UK and for future generations."

Do you not think that I and many others who voted Brexit want the same thing?

How do YOU know what is best for the UK and future generations?

Are you omnipotent, do you have a crystal ball, use tarot cards?

Remember that time Nigel Farage said 52-48 votes should lead to second referendum?

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/remember-that-time-nigel-farage-said-52-48-votes-should-lead-to-second-referendum-5963900/

Apologies for deleted posts,

Do you remember Scotland had a referendum, the leave group lost, they accepted the result for now, so they have unfinnished business.

That is what Nigel Farage said, a 52/48 vote would be unfinnished business, now remain supporters agree with him, he did not say a new referendum now if we lose or overturn this one as we don't like it, unfinnished business just means we will work for a future referendum when we think we will win, like the Scots are doing.

So if the remain supporters want to be in the EU they can vote in a pro EU govenment next time, but unlike when we joined last time, the next time the people must be asked first before we join.

[Thaiwine]

Reminds me of the Poll Tax thingy...

I never did see what was wrong with that, each adult pays a portion of council tax instead of per house. seemed more fair to me

[bkkcanuck8]

Do you remember Scotland had a referendum, the leave group lost, they accepted the result for now, so they have unfinnished business.

Scotland referendum was not unfinished business. They had always said that they would accept a remain vote (at least for a generation) IF the terms of the union do not change SUCH AS Scotland being taken out of the European Union AGAINST HER WILL. The English electorate have initiated a change and are trying to drag Scotland out of the European Union against her will.... therefore it is England that is driving the need for a final decision on whether Scotland will remain in the UK or remain in the European Union [which apparently they cannot have both]. In other words, it was not unfinished business it was triggered by the UK referendum results.

[Thaiwine]

Do you remember Scotland had a referendum, the leave group lost, they accepted the result for now, so they have unfinnished business.

Scotland referendum was not unfinished business. They had always said that they would accept a remain vote (at least for a generation) IF the terms of the union do not change SUCH AS Scotland being taken out of the European Union AGAINST HER WILL. The English electorate have initiated a change and are trying to drag Scotland out of the European Union against her will.... therefore it is England that is driving the need for a final decision on whether Scotland will remain in the UK or remain in the European Union [which apparently they cannot have both]. In other words, it was not unfinished business it was triggered by the UK referendum results.

No need to shout.

It still boils down to "unfinnished business" if your goal is to work for the same goal, no matter how long a time frame you give it.

The vote was for the UK to stay or leave not Scotland.

[bkkcanuck8]

I would have used colours to highlight it ... when I selected white .... I could not read it

I just think it a little annoying when Scotland is not precipitating it, but responding. When someone punches their partner in the gut and the partner walks away - I just don't generally blame the one that got punched in the gut walking away.....

Edited July 4, 2016 by bkkcanuck8

[nontabury]

I would have used colours to highlight it ... when I selected white .... I could not read it

I just think it a little annoying when Scotland is not precipitating it, but responding. When someone punches their partner in the gut and the partner walks away - I just don't generally blame the one that got punched in the gut walking away.....

So how do you now react,regarding Canada being a mere province of Quebec?

[Skywalker69]

So you genuinely believe that if Brexit had narrowly lost, the likes of UKIP would have just accepted it and not continued to campaign and push for another vote? Dream on!

I just want what is best for the UK and for future generations.

You still haven't answered my question.

A simple question for you.

If your side had won and my side had lost would you STILL have wanted another referendum?

I don't know about anybody else but I would have accepted it.

What is a narrow loss?

10,000, 50,000, 100,000 votes? 1 or 2%?

It was over 1,000,000 votes and 3.8%.

quote "I just want what is best for the UK and for future generations."

Do you not think that I and many others who voted Brexit want the same thing?

How do YOU know what is best for the UK and future generations?

Are you omnipotent, do you have a crystal ball, use tarot cards?

Remember that time Nigel Farage said 52-48 votes should lead to second referendum?

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/remember-that-time-nigel-farage-said-52-48-votes-should-lead-to-second-referendum-5963900/

Apologies for deleted posts,

Do you remember Scotland had a referendum, the leave group lost, they accepted the result for now, so they have unfinnished business.

That is what Nigel Farage said, a 52/48 vote would be unfinnished business, now remain supporters agree with him, he did not say a new referendum now if we lose or overturn this one as we don't like it, unfinnished business just means we will work for a future referendum when we think we will win, like the Scots are doing.

So if the remain supporters want to be in the EU they can vote in a pro EU govenment next time, but unlike when we joined last time, the next time the people must be asked first before we join.

"ICYMI – last month he announced that he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin.

Calling a small defeat for his leave camp ‘unfinished business’, he predicted a second referendum on Europe"

[Thaiwine]

Remember that time Nigel Farage said 52-48 votes should lead to second referendum?

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/remember-that-time-nigel-farage-said-52-48-votes-should-lead-to-second-referendum-5963900/

Apologies for deleted posts,

Do you remember Scotland had a referendum, the leave group lost, they accepted the result for now, so they have unfinnished business.

That is what Nigel Farage said, a 52/48 vote would be unfinnished business, now remain supporters agree with him, he did not say a new referendum now if we lose or overturn this one as we don't like it, unfinnished business just means we will work for a future referendum when we think we will win, like the Scots are doing.

So if the remain supporters want to be in the EU they can vote in a pro EU govenment next time, but unlike when we joined last time, the next time the people must be asked first before we join.

"ICYMI – last month he announced that he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin.

Calling a small defeat for his leave camp ‘unfinished business’, he predicted a second referendum on Europe"

Thats what I said,

"unfinnished business just means we will work for a future referendum"

[bkkcanuck8]

I would have used colours to highlight it ... when I selected white .... I could not read it

I just think it a little annoying when Scotland is not precipitating it, but responding. When someone punches their partner in the gut and the partner walks away - I just don't generally blame the one that got punched in the gut walking away.....

So how do you now react,regarding Canada being a mere province of Quebec?

It would change nothing except the name.... you know proportional representation would be the same.

As far as Quebec, I do have some sympathy for them when I hear Quebec asking for certain devolved powers and being told - stay we love you... and we will make a deal with you then coming back and saying... oh you know we said that but the other provinces don't want them and we cannot give them to one province because it would not be fair to treat one specially.

Politically I am a free-trader, libertarian; perfectly happy with high immigration levels and anyone that wants to be Canadian that is willing to come and work I am fine with.... Toronto when I was a child was a boring, bland city. Toronto now is a much more diverse and interesting city and a much more interesting place to live (though I still prefer Bangkok).

As far as heritage, if it matters at all:

Both my parents were born in Montreal but live in Nova Scotia now -- and the funny thing is that I am the only one that cannot converse in French (both my parents were Anglophone - and I grew up in a very English speaking area). Fathers side - grandparents both Scottish, mothers side - mix of Scottish; Irish maybe Dutch originally; and Palatine; and either 1/16th or 1/32 bad blood [aka English Blood - sorry inside joke].

Edited July 4, 2016 by bkkcanuck8

[Skywalker69]

Remember that time Nigel Farage said 52-48 votes should lead to second referendum?

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/remember-that-time-nigel-farage-said-52-48-votes-should-lead-to-second-referendum-5963900/

Apologies for deleted posts,

Do you remember Scotland had a referendum, the leave group lost, they accepted the result for now, so they have unfinnished business.

That is what Nigel Farage said, a 52/48 vote would be unfinnished business, now remain supporters agree with him, he did not say a new referendum now if we lose or overturn this one as we don't like it, unfinnished business just means we will work for a future referendum when we think we will win, like the Scots are doing.

So if the remain supporters want to be in the EU they can vote in a pro EU govenment next time, but unlike when we joined last time, the next time the people must be asked first before we join.

"ICYMI – last month he announced that he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin.

Calling a small defeat for his leave camp ‘unfinished business’, he predicted a second referendum on Europe"

Thats what I said,

"unfinnished business just means we will work for a future referendum"

To me it means that he wouldn´t accept a win for the "stay"side.

[steve654]

From an outsider looking in, a second referendum seems very undemocratic. The people have spoken, the world didn't end and the markets are already stabilizing. UK will be fine and much better off controlling their own destiny.

[bkkcanuck8]

From an outsider looking in, a second referendum seems very undemocratic. The people have spoken, the world didn't end and the markets are already stabilizing. UK will be fine and much better off controlling their own destiny.

I don't view a second referendum as more or less democratic than one referendum.... in some ways some viewpoints may have hardened, some may have regretted, and some that basically said... fine I will leave it up to others may make a second referendum have even more of an impact.... I just don't know one way or another.... From a fair play where you compete and accept the results point of view, it does not seem right.... not unless there is some change -- or some reason other than just not liking the results. Really, if there is to be another referendum - it should not happen now but after article 50 is executed, after the negotiations are done - and the leave lays out the final package of what leave actually looks like or what "faux leave" really looks like (assuming that after article 50 they would accept you back in a one foot out, one foot in type of arrangement). There seems to be a leave leave (in the minority) a leave stay that probably would negotiate what they have now but without a voice.

If UK citizens think they can reform Europe - they are sadly mistaken. EU reform will likely happen at some point in the future.... but by the UK having one foot in and one foot out and never really committed to the European project -- they would never ever be taken seriously. This current agreement that they want out is the best that is politically acceptable to the rest of the union - so if the UK thinks they will get offered the Norway option or .... a more limited agreement in depth and breadth that will require economic restructuring... I think they are fooling themselves. In a void, a UK agreement might make economic sense by itself -- but there are 28 members and giving an agreement to one that is only likely to cause internal political discord at being 2nd class citizens.... makes the likelihood of we will get our cake and eat it too while refusing to eat the broccoli .... almost delusional.

Edited July 4, 2016 by bkkcanuck8

[SgtRock]

Another view on a 2nd referendum

How a Second Brexit Referendum Would Kill the EU

http://fortune.com/2016/07/03/second-brexit-referendum-eu/

Sensible article, probably holding a lot of truth.

[steve654]

From an outsider looking in, a second referendum seems very undemocratic. The people have spoken, the world didn't end and the markets are already stabilizing. UK will be fine and much better off controlling their own destiny.

I don't view a second referendum as more or less democratic than one referendum.... in some ways some viewpoints may have hardened, some may have regretted, and some that basically said... fine I will leave it up to others may make a second referendum have even more of an impact.... I just don't know one way or another.... From a fair play where you compete and accept the results point of view, it does not seem right.... not unless there is some change -- or some reason other than just not liking the results. Really, if there is to be another referendum - it should not happen now but after article 50 is executed, after the negotiations are done - and the leave lays out the final package of what leave actually looks like or what "faux leave" really looks like (assuming that after article 50 they would accept you back in a one foot out, one foot in type of arrangement). There seems to be a leave leave (in the minority) a leave stay that probably would negotiate what they have now but without a voice.

If UK citizens think they can reform Europe - they are sadly mistaken. EU reform will likely happen at some point in the future.... but by the UK having one foot in and one foot out and never really committed to the European project -- they would never ever be taken seriously. This current agreement that they want out is the best that is politically acceptable to the rest of the union - so if the UK thinks they will get offered the Norway option or .... a more limited agreement in depth and breadth that will require economic restructuring... I think they are fooling themselves. In a void, a UK agreement might make economic sense by itself -- but there are 28 members and giving an agreement to one that is only likely to cause internal political discord at being 2nd class citizens.... makes the likelihood of we will get our cake and eat it too while refusing to eat the broccoli .... almost delusional.

I understand what you are saying, but while the EU won't give in too much, many countries in the world will be and are eager to sign new trade agreements with the UK. And whilst the sterling is a little down, a mini tourist boom will happen as a result. Also, for all the wealthy that put on hold their real estate deals, there will probably be many in line to make another deal. I just don't see disaster with the UK. Of course many large corporations are going to have to rethink their approach as the EU markets may or will become more restricted for them, but so many hard working regular people will eventually get decent paying jobs as the borders become tighter again.

[up2u2]

Well so far 41% of people who voted to leave did so based on racism and nothing to do with the economics of staying or leaving. So you tell me the economic benefits of leaving. I am yet to hear any person quantify the economic benefits of leaving the EU. Increase in GDP? increase in employment? increase in wages? strengthening of the Pound? AAA+ Credit Rating? Reduced inflation? Increased Foreign trade? Payment of national debt? Balanced budget forecast? Removal of Austerity? New Export deals? New Trade Deals that favour UK citizens and increase their wealth? Not just 'pie in the sky' some tangible numbers on the table.

If you can provide economic modelling that demonstrates the above it was a sensible vote to leave rather than stay in the EU.

When will the extra 350 million pounds a month start flowing into the NHS?

I have a big serving of lumpy porridge set aside for you.

Why don't you change your tag to 'Everyone who disagrees with me is a racist'.

Why? No one is disagreeing with me. They are confirming that the 'Leave' vote was based on keeping certain nationalities out of the UK. What they are unable to answer is the economic impact leaving the EU will have. When it comes to that issue they have no idea and totally avoid the questions. People are free to be racist. I am neither 'leave' or 'stay' until someone has looked at the economic advantages of each decision.

Seems pretty clear at this point peoples vote was based on racism and xenophobia rather than rational economic advantage or disadvantage.

Can you shed any light on the following?

"the economic benefits of leaving. I am yet to hear any person quantify the economic benefits of leaving the EU. Increase in GDP? increase in employment? increase in wages? strengthening of the Pound? AAA+ Credit Rating? Reduced inflation? Increased Foreign trade? Payment of national debt? Balanced budget forecast? Removal of Austerity? New Export deals? New Trade Deals that favour UK citizens and increase their wealth? Not just 'pie in the sky' some tangible numbers on the table."

I'll take that as a no for now.

[IMA_FARANG]

Sorry to tell you but many of the French don't want you back.

And even German politicians have said that if you want back in The EU, it's on their terms. not yours.

Ben Dover Brit, we have some terms for you, so Ben Dover.

[bkkcanuck8]

From an outsider looking in, a second referendum seems very undemocratic. The people have spoken, the world didn't end and the markets are already stabilizing. UK will be fine and much better off controlling their own destiny.

I don't view a second referendum as more or less democratic than one referendum.... in some ways some viewpoints may have hardened, some may have regretted, and some that basically said... fine I will leave it up to others may make a second referendum have even more of an impact.... I just don't know one way or another.... From a fair play where you compete and accept the results point of view, it does not seem right.... not unless there is some change -- or some reason other than just not liking the results. Really, if there is to be another referendum - it should not happen now but after article 50 is executed, after the negotiations are done - and the leave lays out the final package of what leave actually looks like or what "faux leave" really looks like (assuming that after article 50 they would accept you back in a one foot out, one foot in type of arrangement). There seems to be a leave leave (in the minority) a leave stay that probably would negotiate what they have now but without a voice.

If UK citizens think they can reform Europe - they are sadly mistaken. EU reform will likely happen at some point in the future.... but by the UK having one foot in and one foot out and never really committed to the European project -- they would never ever be taken seriously. This current agreement that they want out is the best that is politically acceptable to the rest of the union - so if the UK thinks they will get offered the Norway option or .... a more limited agreement in depth and breadth that will require economic restructuring... I think they are fooling themselves. In a void, a UK agreement might make economic sense by itself -- but there are 28 members and giving an agreement to one that is only likely to cause internal political discord at being 2nd class citizens.... makes the likelihood of we will get our cake and eat it too while refusing to eat the broccoli .... almost delusional.

I understand what you are saying, but while the EU won't give in too much, many countries in the world will be and are eager to sign new trade agreements with the UK. And whilst the sterling is a little down, a mini tourist boom will happen as a result. Also, for all the wealthy that put on hold their real estate deals, there will probably be many in line to make another deal. I just don't see disaster with the UK. Of course many large corporations are going to have to rethink their approach as the EU markets may or will become more restricted for them, but so many hard working regular people will eventually get decent paying jobs as the borders become tighter again.

These trade agreements with other countries will be a far cry from the depth and breadth of the ones with the EU. The US is pretty hard to come to agreement with because just like many countries they are happen to agree on issues that they think they have an advantage of - but it will be sector by sector. That is assuming that they can get "fast-track" authority, which not many politicians seem to be willing to give to leader of other party - or Democrats in general. Basically without fast-track you negotiate with US negotiators, then sign contract then it goes to congress where everyone adds changes - which of course effectively scuttles it.

[i claudius]

Do to those who say we should have another vote,if there is a general election and one party wind by 52 to 48 ,we should go to the polls again? And what if the vote is exactly the same ,do we try yet again?

I have felt for this and other referendums they should be a clear win not a simple win to force change.

Therefore should there be another referendum I think there needs to be a clear and decisive win to overturn the last referendum, I doubt that would happen.

It is a clear win , if a horse wins a race by a nose ,does that mean they race again?

[bkkcanuck8]

Well so far 41% of people who voted to leave did so based on racism and nothing to do with the economics of staying or leaving. So you tell me the economic benefits of leaving. I am yet to hear any person quantify the economic benefits of leaving the EU. Increase in GDP? increase in employment? increase in wages? strengthening of the Pound? AAA+ Credit Rating? Reduced inflation? Increased Foreign trade? Payment of national debt? Balanced budget forecast? Removal of Austerity? New Export deals? New Trade Deals that favour UK citizens and increase their wealth? Not just 'pie in the sky' some tangible numbers on the table.

If you can provide economic modelling that demonstrates the above it was a sensible vote to leave rather than stay in the EU.

When will the extra 350 million pounds a month start flowing into the NHS?

I have a big serving of lumpy porridge set aside for you.

Why don't you change your tag to 'Everyone who disagrees with me is a racist'.

Why? No one is disagreeing with me. They are confirming that the 'Leave' vote was based on keeping certain nationalities out of the UK. What they are unable to answer is the economic impact leaving the EU will have. When it comes to that issue they have no idea and totally avoid the questions. People are free to be racist. I am neither 'leave' or 'stay' until someone has looked at the economic advantages of each decision.

Seems pretty clear at this point peoples vote was based on racism and xenophobia rather than rational economic advantage or disadvantage.

Can you shed any light on the following?

"the economic benefits of leaving. I am yet to hear any person quantify the economic benefits of leaving the EU. Increase in GDP? increase in employment? increase in wages? strengthening of the Pound? AAA+ Credit Rating? Reduced inflation? Increased Foreign trade? Payment of national debt? Balanced budget forecast? Removal of Austerity? New Export deals? New Trade Deals that favour UK citizens and increase their wealth? Not just 'pie in the sky' some tangible numbers on the table."

I'll take that as a no for now.

The biggest reason to say no was "immigration". Immigration is a big tent and not necessarily xenophobia or racism directly. There will be some of each reason, but to say all that voted leave voted because of one reason would be difficult. Just like it would be hard to say that everyone that voted to remain was not a racist.... just imagine it were a vote on admitting Turkey.... it would have been leave in a landslide

Those that cited immigration may have because:

- they are unskilled and feel threatened (left)

- they don't like competition in the labour market

- and of course xenophobia - which I would include fear of change.... they don't like foreign cultures contaminating or affecting their Britian.

- There are probably those that just don't like people from Southern Europe that are not quite white enough.

But to say it was without a doubt because everyone that voted out for reasons of immigration are racist.... well that would be unfair.... to say some quantifiable amount were likely motivated... probably fair.