Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
When I asked my team lead how he was going to vote he said 'Remain', I said 'Really, why?', he said 'I dunno, what do I know about these things?'

I wonder how many remainers knew what they were voting for?

Well you'd need a vivid imagination to think about bold part but if you have, you can see muslim extremists moving through Europe with ease as fom allows. I personally don't ever see anything like that of course but I think fom is bad.
I came back from Barcelona at the weekend and we had to go through a passport check. All EU citizens went straight through but those from outside the EU had to go through a tougher process. We can protect our boarders now every bit as much as we can when we are outside of the EU.
 
The first part is what I've said all along, this shouldn't be decided by a referendum, people on the whole don't know enough about, on the other hand since the referendum, you read comments and political figures are still continuing with a stream of lies and clearly people still believe it.
You should have watched David Davis today, top class idiot and he's the chief negotiator!
Ok but My team lead was not an idiot despite our difference of opinion. he's an intelligent top bloke, I wont judge him on his voting preference, people should try it.
 
The first part is what I've said all along, this shouldn't be decided by a referendum, people on the whole don't know enough about, on the other hand since the referendum, you read comments and political figures are still continuing with a stream of lies and clearly people still believe it.
You should have watched David Davis today, top class idiot and he's the chief negotiator!

If there was going to be a referendum, then there should've been one on a clear, direct method of leaving the EU, i.e. either a referendum where Leavers argued for leaving the single market and implementing a hard border in Ireland, or one where they advocated retaining freedom of movement and simply leaving the EU in name only. The problem is, of course, that neither option would've won; the former would've been too extreme while the latter wouldn't have inspired anti-EU voters at all. The problem with what we got, though, was that it became a vote in which Leavers could project whatever meaning they desired onto the vote instead of something more definitive and concrete.
 
When I asked my team lead how he was going to vote he said 'Remain', I said 'Really, why?', he said 'I dunno, what do I know about these things?'

I wonder how many remainers knew what they were voting for?

Well you'd need a vivid imagination to think about bold part but if you have, you can see muslim extremists moving through Europe with ease as fom allows. I personally don't ever see anything like that of course but I think fom is bad.

It's probably a bit different for us because we aren't bordering multiple EU countries, but a lot of the Western/Central European countries that border several states probably need it - cross-country travels commonplace for a lot of workers I'd imagine, and border checks all the time would be pretty unfeasible.
 
If there was going to be a referendum, then there should've been one on a clear, direct method of leaving the EU, i.e. either a referendum where Leavers argued for leaving the single market and implementing a hard border in Ireland, or one where they advocated retaining freedom of movement and simply leaving the EU in name only. The problem is, of course, that neither option would've won; the former would've been too extreme while the latter wouldn't have inspired anti-EU voters at all. The problem with what we got, though, was that it became a vote in which Leavers could project whatever meaning they desired onto the vote instead of something more definitive and concrete.
And who gave people that choice?
 
And who gave people that choice?

What choice? We can either leave the single market and implement a hard border in Ireland, therefore violating the Good Friday agreement, or we can remain in the single market and continue to retain freedom of movement. Voters projected either of these realities onto the vote with no concrete idea as to which we were opting for - we still don't know now which one we'll go through with.
 
What choice? We can either leave the single market and implement a hard border in Ireland, therefore violating the Good Friday agreement, or we can remain in the single market and continue to retain freedom of movement. Voters projected either of these realities onto the vote with no concrete idea as to which we were opting for - we still don't know now which one we'll go through with.

In or out, who gave you that choice???
 
So by that logic if the 52% said they didn't know then that would make them intelligent? I think otherwise

If you don't know you have two options, you either don't vote or keep the status quo. Now, it's true that if you don't know you can't justify drastic changes which makes voting to leave stupid.
 
And he admitted that he didn't knew, that's the sign of an intelligent man.
For me. The company I work for sells 90% of it's products to the EU. I want that to be as effortless and free from tariffs as it is now.

As I said above I went to Barca last week it was a spur of the minute thing would I be able to do that if I needed a visa. I used my phone with both calls and data coming from my normal package once we leave I will have to pay extra.

There are a ton of other things that I personally benefit when I want to travel to the continent the EU medical card that allows me to get treatment at the same cost as locals being another perk.
 
Blue passports, fish
Do you hate people that have an opinion on this, do you think it doesn't matter. Do you care that if fishing waters are reviewed that loads of dutch fisheries will collapse. It's so easy to be flippant about things but I'm glad you can just shrug it off as a non issue.
 
Ok, re-read your long winded post and think who gave you the in or out choice, not difficult.

The government did. I'm saying the referendum was fundamentally flawed and a specific Brexit should've been voted on. But that wasn't happening because then defeat would have been guaranteed.
 
Do you hate people that have an opinion on this, do you think it doesn't matter. Do you care that if fishing waters are reviewed that loads of dutch fisheries will collapse. It's so easy to be flippant about things but I'm glad you can just shrug it off as a non issue.
You do realise that most of the fish caught in British waters is sold in France Spain and Italy don't you?
 
The government did. I'm saying the referendum was fundamentally flawed and a specific Brexit should've been voted on. But that wasn't happening because then defeat would have been guaranteed.
Mr Cameron gave you in /out choice, you voted out. What sort of brexit the uk gets is irrelevant, you voted out of the eu.
 
You do realise that most of the fish caught in British waters is sold in France Spain and Italy don't you?
Fully fully aware, since the 80's / 90's. theres an old thread in the general where I mentioned this. That lovely fish you eat in spain, Irish sea. it's called supply and demand. Let the demand and quotas dwindle and let the stocks grow.
 
Mr Cameron gave you in /out choice, you voted out. What sort of brexit the uk gets is irrelevant, you voted out of the eu.

So you would be fine with a Brexit where UK left the EU but kept as close an alignment with them as they possibly could, keeping their regulations, keeping FOM, etc.? After all, if the sort of Brexit the UK gets is irrelevant....
 
Ok but My team lead was not an idiot despite our difference of opinion. he's an intelligent top bloke, I wont judge him on his voting preference, people should try it.

Having a different opinion or voting differently is not a problem , it's when that opinion is based purely on lies, not little fibs but obvious and clear lies.

If there was going to be a referendum, then there should've been one on a clear, direct method of leaving the EU, i.e. either a referendum where Leavers argued for leaving the single market and implementing a hard border in Ireland, or one where they advocated retaining freedom of movement and simply leaving the EU in name only. The problem is, of course, that neither option would've won; the former would've been too extreme while the latter wouldn't have inspired anti-EU voters at all. The problem with what we got, though, was that it became a vote in which Leavers could project whatever meaning they desired onto the vote instead of something more definitive and concrete.

Totally agree but now the government has interpreted that as completely leaving everything, the EU the CU and the SM.
Which means there is a hard border in Ireland, which means they are out of all the EU agencies, which means the City can no longer operate as it does, which means there will be tariffs , enormous delays at ports etc - oddly enough the government don't want this so their interpretation is yet another invention

Mr Cameron gave you in /out choice, you voted out. What sort of brexit the uk gets is irrelevant, you voted out of the eu.

What is your vision of the Brexit after all the dust settles then.
 
Fully fully aware, since the 80's / 90's. theres an old thread in the general where I mentioned this. That lovely fish you eat in spain, Irish sea. it's called supply and demand. Let the demand and quotas dwindle and let the stocks grow.

Sticks have grown because of the quota system
 
When I asked my team lead how he was going to vote he said 'Remain', I said 'Really, why?', he said 'I dunno, what do I know about these things?'

I wonder how many remainers knew what they were voting for?

I think voting for the status quo because you don’t know or can’t project what might happen otherwise, is a perfectly respectable, dare I say prudent approach. It’s practically the sort of position people used to call conservative.
 
Last edited:
In 10 years there will be Iraq war type inquiries into how this clusterfeck happened. On the plus side, it will,hopefully destroy Boris Johnson,
 
The government's plan has been to try and put things off as long as possible and hope that something happens that either means they can avoid the decision or that will somehow make the decision easier. Even at this late stage I still don't believe even the cabinet are united behind a single position. Right now the plan is to hold out on trying to pretend we can cherry pick the best bits of EU membership and that'll be the position until it becomes even more obvious we can't or until there isn't enough time yet to negotiate anything.
 
If you don't know you have two options, you either don't vote or keep the status quo. Now, it's true that if you don't know you can't justify drastic changes which makes voting to leave stupid.
No if you dont like the staus quo you vote against regardless
 
So you would be fine with a Brexit where UK left the EU but kept as close an alignment with them as they possibly could, keeping their regulations, keeping FOM, etc.? After all, if the sort of Brexit the UK gets is irrelevant....
Cameron offered in or out, no specifics, if you don't like it you know who your idiots are
 
This referendum is a case study in why you should require a super majority to make major constitutional changes.
 
No one wants a hard border, so dont have one.

Someone wants a hard border rhen, who is it paul?

Well you'd need a vivid imagination to think about bold part but if you have, you can see muslim extremists moving through Europe with ease as fom allows. I personally don't ever see anything like that of course but I think fom is bad.

:lol: :rolleyes: Typical Brexiter logic. You're contradicting yourself at every turn. If you don't know what you want, what did you vote for? Open border with the EU or not? Leaving the EU means being outside the EU's external border. Which means violating the GFA. You can have one or the other.
 
Watching this clown on Spotlight hurts my head.
The US / Canada border is a great example due to how they scan lorries.
I don't know his name but talk about missing the point.

Edit Ian Duncan Smith