France's Macron says EU door remains open to UK

[nauseus]

22 minutes ago, Grouse said:

What unreasonable demands? The EU have been remarkably reasonable. Like good parents?

100 billion Euros for a start, that's a lot of extra cash after contributing on time with so much, for so long.  

 

The Juncker Junta has changed its mind about its various demands more times Mrs May in the last year!

 

Multiple bad Euro-parents as we know already, now guilty of child abuse!  

 

[Baerboxer]

13 hours ago, Grouse said:

Macron seems very statesman like to me. He's handling the Brexit issue in a very reasonable fashion as I would expect.

 

Agree Grousy. He's coming across as pragmatic, realistic and professional. 

 

Of course if Corbyn wasn't so personally anti EU he'd be jumping up and down and doing all he could not just to oppose the Tories versions of Brexit but to resurrect the whole debate.

 

As Macron and Schauble said, the doors open. But it doesn't look like we have a strong, principled and visionary leader likely to come to the fore. 

 

Sad, sad times for the UK.

 

 

[Grouse]

55 minutes ago, vogie said:

This is not what the Tories or Labour want, it's about what the electorate voted for. You cannot dismiss the referendum just because you don't agree with it.

The CONs and LABs will go with whatever gives most votes. The wind has changed direction and they will tack accordingly, Mr Bosun!

[vogie]

Just now, Grouse said:

The CONs and LABs will go with whatever gives most votes. The wind has changed direction and they will tack accordingly, Mr Bosun!

I agree, but I think that listening to the electorate would be a good start to gain votes and not rejecting our greatest decision since WW2?

[Grouse]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

I agree, but I think that listening to the electorate would be a good start to gain votes and not rejecting our greatest decision since WW2?

Do you mean greatest as in largest? If so I agree. 

 

It was a crap decision though!

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

This is not what the Tories or Labour want, it's about what the electorate voted for. You cannot dismiss the referendum just because you don't agree with it.

 

I agree that you can't dismiss the referendum result. But I can feel pissed off that clown Cameron forgot or couldn't be bothered having a proper structure regarding winning margin required for significant change; and that both sides, but more so those supporting leave, lied and made promises they had no intention of keeping; and some of those who lied have profited from those lies; and the fact that clearly those who were leading the leavers clearly had zero plan or ideas of what to do; and that we have a proven incompetent leader, with the apparent negotiating skills of a donkey, who was actually a remain advocate, trying to lead the Brexit negotiations when she clears as no clue, ability, strength of character and has just fired her 2 most trusted advisers.

 

If a decision is made, which seems to be the wrong decision, and becomes apparent that decision was based on a lot of lies and false information, should that decision be held to be irreversible? May can, and does, U-turns whenever she fancies, just like Corbyn and all the other politicians.

 

This decision has profound implications and consequences for future generations. Probably the most single important decision this century.

 

Should the British people accept this is irreversible because some politicians and the powerful interests that control them say it is? Or should someone say Stop! Time to think again before it's too late.

 

 

[nauseus]

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

I agree that you can't dismiss the referendum result. But I can feel pissed off that clown Cameron forgot or couldn't be bothered having a proper structure regarding winning margin required for significant change he didn't have a brexit plan either; and that both sides, but more so those supporting leave nope - more from remain, lied and made promises they had no intention of keeping; and some of those who lied have profited from those lies; and the fact that clearly those who were leading the leavers clearly had zero plan or ideas of what to do no one had a plan - it was a simple referendum question but the reply shocked the guy that should have had the plan because he called it in the first place; and that we have a proven incompetent leader, with the apparent negotiating skills of a donkey what negotiations have taken place so far then?? who was actually a remain advocate, trying to lead the Brexit negotiations when she clears as no clue, ability, strength of character and has just fired her 2 most trusted advisers obviously not so trustworthy.

 

If a decision is made, which seems to be the wrong decision, and becomes apparent that decision was based on a lot of lies and false information from both sides so  just say they cancel each other, should that decision be held to be irreversible? May can, and does, U-turns whenever she fancies, just like Corbyn and all the other politicians and Uncle Tom Cobley and all.

 

This decision has profound implications and consequences for future generations. Probably the most single important decision this century. Agreed but obviously not for the reasons that you are thinking of.

 

Should the British people accept this is irreversible because some politicians and the powerful interests that control them say it is? Or should someone say Stop! Time to think again before it's too late. That's been happening since the referendum result!  

 

 

[Grouse]

In my experience, EU doors are very high quality. Have a good look as we walk through!

[nauseus]

Just now, Grouse said:

In my experience, EU doors are very high quality. Have a good look as we walk through!

I just hope they're not cat flaps set to one-way only!

[lamyai3]

19 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

I agree that you can't dismiss the referendum result. But I can feel pissed off that clown Cameron forgot or couldn't be bothered having a proper structure regarding winning margin required for significant change; and that both sides, but more so those supporting leave, lied and made promises they had no intention of keeping; and some of those who lied have profited from those lies; and the fact that clearly those who were leading the leavers clearly had zero plan or ideas of what to do; and that we have a proven incompetent leader, with the apparent negotiating skills of a donkey, who was actually a remain advocate, trying to lead the Brexit negotiations when she clears as no clue, ability, strength of character and has just fired her 2 most trusted advisers.

 

If a decision is made, which seems to be the wrong decision, and becomes apparent that decision was based on a lot of lies and false information, should that decision be held to be irreversible? May can, and does, U-turns whenever she fancies, just like Corbyn and all the other politicians.

 

This decision has profound implications and consequences for future generations. Probably the most single important decision this century.

 

Should the British people accept this is irreversible because some politicians and the powerful interests that control them say it is? Or should someone say Stop! Time to think again before it's too late.

 

 

I agree. I'm baffled as to why a second referendum isn't being discussed in light of the above. 

[vogie]

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

I agree that you can't dismiss the referendum result. But I can feel pissed off that clown Cameron forgot or couldn't be bothered having a proper structure regarding winning margin required for significant change; and that both sides, but more so those supporting leave, lied and made promises they had no intention of keeping; and some of those who lied have profited from those lies; and the fact that clearly those who were leading the leavers clearly had zero plan or ideas of what to do; and that we have a proven incompetent leader, with the apparent negotiating skills of a donkey, who was actually a remain advocate, trying to lead the Brexit negotiations when she clears as no clue, ability, strength of character and has just fired her 2 most trusted advisers.

 

If a decision is made, which seems to be the wrong decision, and becomes apparent that decision was based on a lot of lies and false information, should that decision be held to be irreversible? May can, and does, U-turns whenever she fancies, just like Corbyn and all the other politicians.

 

This decision has profound implications and consequences for future generations. Probably the most single important decision this century.

 

Should the British people accept this is irreversible because some politicians and the powerful interests that control them say it is? Or should someone say Stop! Time to think again before it's too late.

 

 

You make a very eloquent point,

 

29 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

I agree that you can't dismiss the referendum result. But I can feel pissed off that clown Cameron forgot or couldn't be bothered having a proper structure regarding winning margin required for significant change; and that both sides, but more so those supporting leave, lied and made promises they had no intention of keeping; and some of those who lied have profited from those lies; and the fact that clearly those who were leading the leavers clearly had zero plan or ideas of what to do; and that we have a proven incompetent leader, with the apparent negotiating skills of a donkey, who was actually a remain advocate, trying to lead the Brexit negotiations when she clears as no clue, ability, strength of character and has just fired her 2 most trusted advisers.

 

If a decision is made, which seems to be the wrong decision, and becomes apparent that decision was based on a lot of lies and false information, should that decision be held to be irreversible? May can, and does, U-turns whenever she fancies, just like Corbyn and all the other politicians.

 

This decision has profound implications and consequences for future generations. Probably the most single important decision this century.

 

Should the British people accept this is irreversible because some politicians and the powerful interests that control them say it is? Or should someone say Stop! Time to think again before it's too late.

 

 

You reply is very eloquently written, but it has a slight bias to it, from I can see anyway. I suppose it all depends on which side of the fence we sit, as to how we word our replies.

 

Cameron should have little or no consequence as to the state of affairs now, why should we have had a margin, surely a majority decision is all that matters, going to the extreme you could say that we want a 90% majority before we will accept the decision. As to the "most trusted" of her advisers, the Tories would have had a landslide victory if it hadn't been for the incompetence of her advisers.

 

Nobody can say at this stage whether it is the right or wrong decision to leave, all we can do is respect the democratic decision that has been made and do what we think is the right one for our country, it is unfortunate that it has split the country down the middle. It seems to me that you are an intelligent man and would not take notice of convoluted messages on the side of a bus, and the like, it appears to be an excuse for some of the remainers to have a go and nobody really believes it.

 

The British people are still very supportive of leaving the EU and due to popular belief from some of the remainers, it didn't have a rats tail to do with the election result.

 

But thank you for your well written post.

[vogie]

13 minutes ago, Grouse said:

In my experience, EU doors are very high quality. Have a good look as we walk through!

One thing I agree on, EU doors come complete with their casings making them very to fit.

[Baerboxer]

10 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I agree that you can't dismiss the referendum result. But I can feel pissed off that clown Cameron forgot or couldn't be bothered having a proper structure regarding winning margin required for significant change he didn't have a brexit plan either; and that both sides, but more so those supporting leave nope - more from remain, lied and made promises they had no intention of keeping; and some of those who lied have profited from those lies; and the fact that clearly those who were leading the leavers clearly had zero plan or ideas of what to do no one had a plan - it was a simple referendum question but the reply shocked the guy that should have had the plan because he called it in the first place; and that we have a proven incompetent leader, with the apparent negotiating skills of a donkey what negotiations have taken place so far then?? who was actually a remain advocate, trying to lead the Brexit negotiations when she clears as no clue, ability, strength of character and has just fired her 2 most trusted advisers obviously not so trustworthy.

 

If a decision is made, which seems to be the wrong decision, and becomes apparent that decision was based on a lot of lies and false information from both sides so  just say they cancel each other, should that decision be held to be irreversible? May can, and does, U-turns whenever she fancies, just like Corbyn and all the other politicians and Uncle Tom Cobley and all.

 

This decision has profound implications and consequences for future generations. Probably the most single important decision this century. Agreed but obviously not for the reasons that you are thinking of.

 

Should the British people accept this is irreversible because some politicians and the powerful interests that control them say it is? Or should someone say Stop! Time to think again before it's too late. That's been happening since the referendum result!  

 

1. Cameron never had a Brexit plan because he was leading the Remain side. What does that do with him  failing to include intelligent rules for winning margins??

2. Would you like to prove that?

3. Cameron never believed he'd loose or he would never have called it. When he did he had no alternative to resign. So any plan for Brexit would never have been on his agenda.

4. Hello - where have you been? What do you think the preamble between May and various EU leaders and bureaucrats has been so far? Polite passing the time of day? 

5. So the advisers were fired for screwing up the election - what, calling it; or advising on May's arrogant and wooden campaign?

6. Agreed. So nothing is cast in stone. Therefore no reason to consider it closed and beyond opening again.

7. Never he met a mind reader before! And what do you think were the reasons I was thinking of?

8. Has it really? The leaders of the 2 biggest British political parties are both still supporting it. Nothing has been tabled, AFAIK, in parliament to reopen the discussions. So what do you think is going on, meaningfully going on?

[vogie]

12 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

I agree. I'm baffled as to why a second referendum isn't being discussed in light of the above. 

Because the electorate doesn't want one, only you. I hope that has cleared that one up.

[Baerboxer]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

Because the electorate doesn't want one, only you. I hope that has cleared that one up.

 

How do you know? No one has asked them?

[lamyai3]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

Because the electorate doesn't want one, only you. I hope that has cleared that one up.

Surely you can come up with a better reply than this? 

[vogie]

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

How do you know? No one has asked them?

Wrong

[vogie]

2 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Surely you can come up with a better reply than this? 

I'm sorry I don't have time to explain it to you or the crayons.

[Baerboxer]

5 minutes ago, vogie said:

Wrong

 

Please provide evidence of your assertion.

[vogie]

Just now, Baerboxer said:

 

Please provide evidence of your assertion.

British people are still as keen to leave the EU, is this the evidence you seek?

[nauseus]

6 minutes ago, vogie said:

o the "most trusted" of her advisers, t

 

5 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

has profound implications and consequences for future generation

 

5 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

1. Cameron never had a Brexit plan because he was leading the Remain side. What does that do with him  failing to include intelligent rules for winning margins??  he called it in the first place and was responsible for contingency plans in case of leaving!!

2. Would you like to prove that? Yes but I won't - it takes too long.

3. Cameron never believed he'd loose or he would never have called it. When he did he had no alternative to resign. So any plan for Brexit would never have been on his agenda. See above (1).

4. Hello - where have you been? What do you think the preamble between May and various EU leaders and bureaucrats has been so far? Polite passing the time of day? Hello - then why were negotiations due to start on 19th June???

5. So the advisers were fired for screwing up the election - what, calling it; or advising on May's arrogant and wooden campaign? Manifesto.

6. Agreed. So nothing is cast in stone. Therefore no reason to consider it closed and beyond opening again. I said cancelled

7. Never he met a mind reader before! And what do you think were the reasons I was thinking of? hoping to stay in the EU.

8. Has it really? The leaders of the 2 biggest British political parties are both still supporting it. Nothing has been tabled, AFAIK, in parliament to reopen the discussions. So what do you think is going on, meaningfully going on? There have been various attempts to  block and stall Brexit since the referendum via the courts, Lords and elsewhere. 

 

[dunroaming]

14 minutes ago, vogie said:

Because the electorate doesn't want one, only you. I hope that has cleared that one up.

I think you are right that the electorate has no appetite for any more elections or referendums at the moment.  I am sure they just want the whole sorry affair of brexit brought to a close.  One way for that to happen would be for brexit to be scrapped so we can get some stability back.  I am pretty certain that more people want that today than those who don't.

 

Unlikely that will happen though so prepare yourselves for two years of arguing and bickering and then ending up far worse off than we started.

[lamyai3]

7 minutes ago, vogie said:

I'm sorry I don't have time to explain it to you or the crayons.

Actually, it's an open question, you don't need to reply if you don't understand it. 

 

For anyone who actually might have an informed opinion, is there a reason that a second referendum is off the table? The cost of Brexit was not remotely spelt out before the original referendum, and the polls all indicated remain would happen, causing large complacency and non voting in large sections of the younger population (many of whom have woken up to their mistake in last week's election). 

 

If the will of the British electorate is so clear, what would be the harm in a second referendum to make sure? "The people have spoken" is being trotted out ad nauseam by the government and yet they seem terrified to take any kind of step to find out if this is actually true. 

[vogie]

2 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

I think you are right that the electorate has no appetite for any more elections or referendums at the moment.  I am sure they just want the whole sorry affair of brexit brought to a close.  One way for that to happen would be for brexit to be scrapped so we can get some stability back.  I am pretty certain that more people want that today than those who don't.

 

Unlikely that will happen though so prepare yourselves for two years of arguing and bickering and then ending up far worse off than we started.

Oh you started your post off so well, but you are missing the point, the British electorate do not want Brexit to be scrapped. When you say "I am pretty certain that more people want that today than those who don't." You would be wrong, As many people today still want to leave the EU.

[nauseus]

2 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Actually, it's an open question, you don't need to reply if you don't understand it. 

 

For anyone who actually might have an informed opinion, is there a reason that a second referendum is off the table? The cost of Brexit was not remotely spelt out before the original referendum, and the polls all indicated remain would happen, causing large complacency and non voting in large sections of the younger population (many of whom have woken up to their mistake in last week's election). 

 

If the will of the British electorate is so clear, what would be the harm in a second referendum to make sure? "The people have spoken" is being trotted out ad nauseam by the government and yet they seem terrified to take any kind of step to find out if this is actually true. 

The step was taken and it was called the referendum! It was not a movie so there was never to be a sequel! 

[Baerboxer]

15 minutes ago, vogie said:

You make a very eloquent point,

 

You reply is very eloquently written, but it has a slight bias to it, from I can see anyway. I suppose it all depends on which side of the fence we sit, as to how we word our replies.

 

Cameron should have little or no consequence as to the state of affairs now, why should we have had a margin, surely a majority decision is all that matters, going to the extreme you could say that we want a 90% majority before we will accept the decision. As to the "most trusted" of her advisers, the Tories would have had a landslide victory if it hadn't been for the incompetence of her advisers.

 

Nobody can say at this stage whether it is the right or wrong decision to leave, all we can do is respect the democratic decision that has been made and do what we think is the right one for our country, it is unfortunate that it has split the country down the middle. It seems to me that you are an intelligent man and would not take notice of convoluted messages on the side of a bus, and the like, it appears to be an excuse for some of the remainers to have a go and nobody really believes it.

 

The British people are still very supportive of leaving the EU and due to popular belief from some of the remainers, it didn't have a rats tail to do with the election result.

 

But thank you for your well written post.

 

It is normally prudent for referendums on constitutional change to require certain % winning before accepting a massive change. Leaving it open means the result could've been decided by 1 vote. But, if you are ok with elections and referendums being decided on that basis then so be it. Interesting that the Leave campaigners said they would not accept a close result if they lost prior to the referendum. 

May employed her advisers, not the other way around. They advise, she decides. She fought the worst campaign I can remember. 

 

Many people did believe the lies spouted by leading politicians during the campaign. Probably the worst lies that I've witnessed in UK political campaigning ever.

 

Do you have any prove that Brexit had no influence on the election results? May sought to make Brexit, and her "strong and stable" leadership of the Brexit negotiations the key issue. I agree that many voters thought otherwise and austerity, NHS, Security, were important to them. But, many still didn't trust Corbyn to handle Brexit. 

 

51.89% voted to leave,  48.11% voted to remain; out of a 72.21% Turnout. So 37.47% of the electorate supported leave, 34.74% supported remaining and 27.73% either didn't want to or for some reason were unable to vote. ( A small number of papers were spoiled). 

On what basis are you suggesting that "British people are very supportive of leaving"?

[vogie]

1 minute ago, lamyai3 said:

Actually, it's an open question, you don't need to reply if you don't understand it. 

 

For anyone who actually might have an informed opinion, is there a reason that a second referendum is off the table? The cost of Brexit was not remotely spelt out before the original referendum, and the polls all indicated remain would happen, causing large complacency and non voting in large sections of the younger population (many of whom have woken up to their mistake in last week's election). 

 

If the will of the British electorate is so clear, what would be the harm in a second referendum to make sure? "The people have spoken" is being trotted out ad nauseam by the government and yet they seem terrified to take any kind of step to find out if this is actually true. 

Listen, I will say this only once, the British people do not want another referendum, its only people like you want another referendum. Your post is totally gobbly gook, it has nothing to do with the election, the will of the people is very clear, so no more referendums. Incidently I have no intention of getting bogged down with the 'I still believe the Earth is flat brigade'

[Baerboxer]

7 minutes ago, vogie said:

Oh you started your post off so well, but you are missing the point, the British electorate do not want Brexit to be scrapped. When you say "I am pretty certain that more people want that today than those who don't." You would be wrong, As many people today still want to leave the EU.

 

How can you substantiate your last sentence? Seriously, you have no way of knowing. It could be the same, less or even more surely?

[dunroaming]

8 minutes ago, vogie said:

Oh you started your post off so well, but you are missing the point, the British electorate do not want Brexit to be scrapped. When you say "I am pretty certain that more people want that today than those who don't." You would be wrong, As many people today still want to leave the EU.

Then a second referendum would make sense wouldn't it?  Now that people know the reality of brexit and have realised all the promises were lies and we aren't going to stop people coming here from the EU countries.  Surely given that, the people do have the right of another vote.  But as I said the people are sick of being asked to make their own decisions so why not make them for them?

[vogie]

4 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

It is normally prudent for referendums on constitutional change to require certain % winning before accepting a massive change. Leaving it open means the result could've been decided by 1 vote. But, if you are ok with elections and referendums being decided on that basis then so be it. Interesting that the Leave campaigners said they would not accept a close result if they lost prior to the referendum. 

May employed her advisers, not the other way around. They advise, she decides. She fought the worst campaign I can remember. 

 

Many people did believe the lies spouted by leading politicians during the campaign. Probably the worst lies that I've witnessed in UK political campaigning ever.

 

Do you have any prove that Brexit had no influence on the election results? May sought to make Brexit, and her "strong and stable" leadership of the Brexit negotiations the key issue. I agree that many voters thought otherwise and austerity, NHS, Security, were important to them. But, many still didn't trust Corbyn to handle Brexit. 

 

51.89% voted to leave,  48.11% voted to remain; out of a 72.21% Turnout. So 37.47% of the electorate supported leave, 34.74% supported remaining and 27.73% either didn't want to or for some reason were unable to vote. ( A small number of papers were spoiled). 

On what basis are you suggesting that "British people are very supportive of leaving"?

'You gov' did a survey and the results are as follows. I know you will come back with some spin on it. Can you provide any evidence to the contrary?

 

1. There is still not much Bregret

There is still little sign of any “Bregret”. There is a media appetite for a narrative of the public changing their mind and some newspaper stories based on open-access voodoo polls or cherry-picking individual polls, but the broad picture is consistent: the vast majority of people still think the way they voted in June 2016 was correct.