Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

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


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Is shown that the leave campaign was financed with illicit money. That lies were told like the 350 millions for the NHS and many other lies. They didn't take in account the GFA, the delays on customs, losing the FTA and many others

You claim that circumstances brought wht country to a referemdum. Leave was voted in

Many others claims that the circumstances I state above are circumstances that should bring the country to a referendum

Don't you think you are waving another referendum under the same circumstances and reasons?

Is a pitty that you are leaving this way. One might thought you don't like solid arguments

I feel sorry for the amount of tin foil wasted in the production of this post
 
I feel sorry for the amount of tin foil wasted in the production of this post

Well. you reach the cul-de-sac that brexiters reach when faced with arguments on a second referendum. In reality is more simple. why so afraid of a second one?

was nice to chat with a brexit cliche
 
Who said that? Farage and Mogg both proposed further votes if they lost.

David Cameron, the Prime Minister when he announced the vote. The referendum was a manifesto promise in 2015 when he won a majority of seats.



He also said "“I am absolutely clear a referendum is a referendum, it’s a once in a generation, once in a lifetime opportunity and the result determines the outcome"

Furthermore, in 2017 both the Tories and Labour were explicit in their manifestos that they would enact Brexit
 
A question. The referendum said that exiting the EU would mean ending free of Movement? what means brexit?

Leave is very clear. It means that the UK would no loner be a party to the Treaty of Rome, as amended at Maastrict and Lisbon.

Anything contained in those treaties would cease to apply, that's what "leave the european union" means.
 
David Cameron, the Prime Minister when he announced the vote. The referendum was a manifesto promise in 2015 when he won a majority of seats.



He also said "“I am absolutely clear a referendum is a referendum, it’s a once in a generation, once in a lifetime opportunity and the result determines the outcome"

Furthermore, in 2017 both the Tories and Labour were explicit in their manifestos that they would enact Brexit

yeah but he also said he doesn't feck pigs so
 
You are struggling to form an opinion when presented with an alternate viewpoint, an understandable condition. Unfortunate but understandable
:lol: You are contradicting yourself within a few post. Desperate times.
 
Given that neither won a majority you can argue both of those manifestos were rejected by the will of the people and therefore are as relavant as nick cleggs manifesto on tuition fees

While the '2nd ref opportunists'' got a handful of counties between them. So the will of the people was against remain by your logic

Also, the logic of a real and direct vote was leave
 
These fairytale versions of Brexit, why is there never a roadmap? It's always 'I believe thing is going to happen and its going to be a success... I don't know how it's going to happen but trust me... I believe!'

And they have the nerve not to expect any pushback...
 
These fairytale versions of Brexit, why is there never a roadmap? It's always 'I believe thing is going to happen and its going to be a success... I don't know how it's going to happen but trust me... I believe!'

And they have the nerve not to expect any pushback...

Have you a roadmap of how the EU will take Britain to continued prosperity until at least 2100 please? As i've not seen one presented

I'd also be interested in how that roadmap to a utopian existence will address the problem of discrimination against ethnic groups and the use of racial based terminology in everyday language. As an example, using a term such as 'White Crusaders' to describe a perceived negative issue of western/ European people offering charity to deprived areas of Africa, even though such a 'problem' could be conducted by people of multiple ethnicities
 
Given that neither won a majority you can argue both of those manifestos were rejected by the will of the people and therefore are as relavant as nick cleggs manifesto on tuition fees

Not on this topic as they both said the same thing
 
Have you a roadmap of how the EU will take Britain to continued prosperity until at least 2100 please? As i've not seen one presented

I'd also be interested in how that roadmap to a utopian existence will address the problem of discrimination against ethnic groups and the use of racial based terminology in everyday language. As an example, using a term such as 'White Crusaders' to describe a perceived negative issue of western/ European people offering charity to deprived areas of Africa, even though such a 'problem' could be conducted by people of multiple ethnicities


You: We've got to jump off this perfectly fine ship and swim out into the sea looking for land. For reasons...

Me: Do you have a map, location or destination?

You: ...Do you have a map, location or destination?

Me: ......I don't need one, this ship knows where its going...

You: ..........Blows raspberry...


But seriously, it's amazing that you keep playing that (white people) victim card...

Nothing to add as usual. Well I won't derail this thread by sustained tit for tat. I'm sure people will be interested when you decide to offer an opinion on the topic of this thread
If you hadn't noticed, this thread had already slowed to a crawl due to no new news. It only picked up once you started talking shite.

Nobody wants to hear me repeat the same statements that I and others have said and listened to several times... In fact nobody wants to hear you parrot the same taking points leavers have posted before either... They probably (like me) checked in on the off chance you might say something different, interesting, debate worthy..... Alas... I'll leave y'all too it....
 
Last edited:
You: We've got to jump off this perfectly fine ship and swim out into the sea looking for land. For reasons...

Me: Do you have a map, location or destination?

You: ...Do you have a map, location or destination?

Me: ......I don't need one, this ship knows where its going...

You: ..........Blows raspberry...


But seriously, it's amazing that you keep playing that (white people) victim card...

Nothing to add as usual. Well I won't derail this thread by sustained tit for tat.

I'm sure people will be interested when you decide to offer an opinion on the topic of this thread
 
Leave is very clear. It means that the UK would no loner be a party to the Treaty of Rome, as amended at Maastrict and Lisbon.

Anything contained in those treaties would cease to apply, that's what "leave the european union" means.

So not wanting the freedom of Movement is something extra that the May added on quitting the EU, because FoM is about the EEA and not the EU.

So why you don't leave the EU staying on the EEA is beyond my comprehension. The Referendum said nothing about the EEA and the four freedoms

Do you agree?
 
So not wanting the freedom of Movement is something extra that the May added on quitting the EU, because FoM is about the EEA and not the EU.

So why you don't leave the EU staying on the EEA is beyond my comprehension. The Referendum said nothing about the EEA and the four freedoms

Do you agree?

I do.

But we have a parliament half full of incompetent children who can’t be bothered to deal with serious issues, and half full of lying malevolent shits who won’t listen to any reason.
 
There's 2 million people now eligible to vote who weren't at the last ref and they'll be more impacted than anyone (especially all those old folk dead)....yet the leavetards in here think that sticking to a 2 year old vote that's proved undeliverable without asking 'are you sure?' Is the democratic path?

It should nullify any further points from them.
 
There's 2 million people now eligible to vote who weren't at the last ref and they'll be more impacted than anyone (especially all those old folk dead)....yet the leavetards in here think that sticking to a 2 year old vote that's proved undeliverable without asking 'are you sure?' Is the democratic path?

It should nullify any further points from them.
This is one of those times when 16-year-olds should have a say. I'm not usually in favour of lowering the age for voting, but this will affect them a lot over the next decade.

It also mildly bothers me that the older folk are always classed as the pro-leavers. There were plenty of young people who voted leave, too. And of course, all those people who didn't vote at all because they weren't interested in the whole issue.
 
The to.escakes are roughly from 2030 to at least the end of the century

I can't quote you recent economic trade trends to answer a timescale thst has many factors thst cause uncertainty , but I can state what I believe are abilities that help a national economy thrive in a changing global economy

I've highlighted some of those in the previous post. But as a quick sum, I don't believe Europe will grow as quick as other parts of the world and it is currently based on a culture of protectionism. Those two key components are not a good mix for long term prosperity

So no evidence then. Nor is there any reason given why being part of the EU necessarily precludes access to these fast growing economies.
 
David Cameron, the Prime Minister when he announced the vote. The referendum was a manifesto promise in 2015 when he won a majority of seats.



He also said "“I am absolutely clear a referendum is a referendum, it’s a once in a generation, once in a lifetime opportunity and the result determines the outcome"

Furthermore, in 2017 both the Tories and Labour were explicit in their manifestos that they would enact Brexit


What Cameron said (ex-PM and ex-MP) has no binding effect on the current Cabinet and parliament. He is also utterly discredited as a politician (worst PM in history contender) and his past pronouncements have zero moral authority.

As for the Tory and Labour manifestos, we are two years further on from when they were drawn up and, after the impressive display of unity and consistency in negotiation on the part of the EU, it is now clear what Brexit entails. In any business, you would seriously reconsider whether to scrap the project at this stage after initial projections have proved to be wildly off the mark. Asked privately, I’d guess around 4/5 of the house of commons would agree that this is all a stupid idea if it wasn’t for party political management and loss of face.
 
This is one of those times when 16-year-olds should have a say. I'm not usually in favour of lowering the age for voting, but this will affect them a lot over the next decade.

It also mildly bothers me that the older folk are always classed as the pro-leavers. There were plenty of young people who voted leave, too. And of course, all those people who didn't vote at all because they weren't interested in the whole issue.

Oh i didn't mean to make that insinuation, my point was as found by YouGov that circa 160k remainers die each year but 320k leavers do as well.

It's preposterous that the dead hold a say from beyond the grave whilst all those young uns now of voting age get none.
 
Bola is just the latest in a long line of posters to enter this thread (or the Trump one) and spout a load of meaningless catchphrases, completely ignore reasoned questions and facts when presented to them, fail to offer any kind of support for their claims, then declare the thread an echo chamber and act all smug like they're intellectually superior.

Every time it leads to pages of nonsense.
 
Bola is just the latest in a long line of posters to enter this thread (or the Trump one) and spout a load of meaningless catchphrases, completely ignore reasoned questions and facts when presented to them, fail to offer any kind of support for their claims, then declare the thread an echo chamber and act all smug like they're intellectually superior.

Every time it leads to pages of nonsense.
I was wondering why the thread had suddenly increased in size by 4 or 5 pages. I thought something interesting had happened.
 
This is one of those times when 16-year-olds should have a say. I'm not usually in favour of lowering the age for voting, but this will affect them a lot over the next decade.
It also mildly bothers me that the older folk are always classed as the pro-leavers. There were plenty of young people who voted leave, too. And of course, all those people who didn't vote at all because they weren't interested in the whole issue.


First bit of sense on this age/youngsters commentary to appear on this forum congrats @Penna

Oh i didn't mean to make that insinuation, my point was as found by YouGov that circa 160k remainers die each year but 320k leavers do as well.

It's preposterous that the dead hold a say from beyond the grave whilst all those young uns now of voting age get none.

"Standing on the shoulders of Giants" perhaps?
 
Laughing face. Nice to keep up the humour when perplexed

Just been listening to Brain Damage by Pink Floyd.
Perfect description of Brexit but much more fun to listen to.

Lots of people are very uptight about this subject so I strongly recommend taking a few minutes out to listen to the very apt lyrics.
 
So no evidence then. Nor is there any reason given why being part of the EU necessarily precludes access to these fast growing economies.

And you have bundles of evidence to show how the EU will lead Britain to great prosperity up to at least 2100?

I look forward to you posting it
 
Exactly, they proposed to join EFTA. That's when people should ask themselves what Brexit actually meant, the 17m of leavers didn't vote for the same conclusion, some voted for what is effectively No Deal but many voted for something entirely different and as of today we have no idea who voted for what.

For me a second referendum should have happened whether it is purely about the exit options or the possibility of withdrawing because as things stands most voters from both sides are getting screwed.

So in fact the government have no mandate to leave the EEA - just as well Leavers knew what they were voting for.
 
And you have bundles of evidence to show how the EU will lead Britain to great prosperity up to at least 2100?

I look forward to you posting it

The EU doesn't lead the UK anywhere. The UK is part of the EU and lead itself wherever it wants by either influencing the EU's routs or by opting out of new treaties if it wants to. Your question is the same as asking if the UK will lead itself to great prosperity up to at least 2100?
 
Order, Order, Point of Order!!

Instead of focussing on the referendum , shouldn't some legal expert team prevent the government leaving under false pretences.

Leavers have not actually voted to stop FoM or leaving the Single Market. The government only have a mandate to leave the EU. Not the same thing.

If only the government had a party in opposition and one who had some brains.