2.7 Million Brexiteers Have Changed to Remain

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:17 pm

What this won't do in the slightest btw is unify the country.

Its going to make it worse, especially if you continue to believe stuff that is demonstratively not true.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:19 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:And it has to be said, you refuse to accept that the Brexit that was promised before the referendum is not the one that is going to be delivered.

It's easy to forget this amid all the noise, but it's such an important point that bears repeating over and over again.

What the Leave campaign promised the general public in the 2016 referendum is undeliverable.

That is enough of a reason by itself to refer this back to the general public.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:21 pm

What the Leave campaign promised was to leave the EU.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:21 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Ringo levels there bleeding.

A no deal is not the middle ground. How can anyone seriously believe that it is?

No I don't, and I'm not sure what I said to that end.
I realise that a no deal is to one extreme and that is why I'm bemused that many seem to think May s failure to find that middle ground would lead to the UK not leaving or a 2nd referendum it will lead to a Hard Brexit
I am questioning any one that is currently suggesting that Mrs May speech is embarrassing rather than the EU hierarchies behavior in Salzburg

HatfieldClaret · Post by **HatfieldClaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:22 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Ringo, i've just blocked you. I've had enough.

I posted on here twice today answering your question. Once to answer it, and once to draw your attention to the post I answered it.

You just don't read any replies to you. So there is no point replying to you.

Replace the word 'Ringo' with Barnier or Tusk and you have an abbreviated version of TM's speech.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:25 pm

Re post 922..

Not at all JM, that will not happen, ever.

You appear to think you have found a gem there, and got all excited..calm down lad.

The point you make there, may well have been made by other people [maybe many other people] - I doubt if you can attach me to it though.

It is not an important point....'more than' versus 'as much as'.....no one can actually prove it, one way or the other...an argument going nowhere that one.

** i have not got very involved in the Brexit stuff on here..to be honest I would rather spend my time on other things, rather than spend hours on here arguing with people [a] who will never change their mind on anything who are really not right in the head.
[ not referring to you, Lancs, nil and a few others]

So I just dip in now and again, say a couple of things...

1]What I do worry about [thinking back to the Referendum and everything around it] is the effect on future democracy if BREXIT is not implemented in the way that that majority voted for back then.

- I know it was messy and that Cameron bloke [where did he scuttle to ?] has a lot to answer for..but the result was clear cut and if a form of Brexit is not implemented, there will be trouble.

Some constituencies now, only deliver about 45% turnout in a General Election...I don't need to explain the dangers of 'low turnout' nationally, if large numbers of people believe that their votes are being ignored [reversed?]....loads already feel dis-enfranchised, and outside 'the system'.

2] NO ONE knows what the economic results of a Brexit will be.
Many are predicting it, and there is some consensus - this is all short term though....first three years?

For me, looking down the line, 10 to 15 years, this is too far ahead for anyone to know [even that clown Mark Carney, who thinks he knows far more than he does...he should say less and listen more]..

i think the long term effects..15/20/25/50 years ahead, will be pretty positive for the UK...by then, we'll be trading favourably again with the EU [we are a rich country, they want our MONEY] plus the rest of the world will have broadly opened up to us for trading purposes - China, Russia, South America, USA and Canada, SE Asia and many more....Africa will eventually present differently.

Substantial trading opportunities will become available to us, once we have cast off the straight-jacket of the EU...we have to be patient.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:27 pm

Apologies if that was the case bleeding

I think the problem is that everyone knows a deal is better than no deal, but people want a deal under their own terms.

The problem is for us, is that we are leaving. We can't expect the EU to bend over for us, but we've been promised from Day One that they would.

The failure to find a middle ground is because of the red lines of TM to preserve the unity of the Conservative Party.

The only solution to that (at least it looks that way now) is either a "No Deal" or an election/peoples vote.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:27 pm

Hhahahahaha!

V.Good Hatfield!

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:31 pm

Don't think I'm not self aware.

They'll be those of you watching from the silent sidelines ( about 10 max!) Thinking "good for you lancs. Ignore the **** . Don't give him the oxygen he so craves"

I get it. I genuinely do.

However, how many times have various posters who have a different view to Lancaster Claret been left gob smacked by the real dismissive arrogance that he very quickly displays in many many of his sneering posts. So much so that they have to check his superiority and point out that they aren't stupid, they aren't backward and some how, inferior to him.

Even he saw the funny side of his pontificating pronouncement that he has an unfortunate habit of being right most of the time.

He's wrong and it really does seem to have hit a raw nerve. Particularly because it's the "Ringoeconomics" that's proven him to be. That ego of his is bruised and the fact he's refused to admit he's wrong proves it.

I feel sorry for him. Genuinely. At the end of the day he's a bright bloke and a claret to boot. Politics to one side I dare say we'd get on royally, over a pint, chewing over the post match talking points, and end up shaking the lads hand.

Guich · Post by **Guich** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:41 pm

I'm no fan of TM but I do think the EU leaders aren't doing themselves any favours.

Yesterday morning Tusk was apparently leading a group, including Netherlands and Belgium, who wanted to give some ground, but couldn't convince Germany and France. And the way the highly respected Belgian pro EU commentator Marc Roche has been vilified and abused by Europhiles on the continent for suggesting Brexit will be a success, smacks of blind faith to some sort of cult. They are very defensive, unsurprisingly.

Tusk using social media to mock the PM is, frankly, shoddy and again looks desperate.

As a remain voter I am a little uneasy at all this. And I don't think there was anything wrong at all with TM's tone, if not the entire content.

And, ever the optimist, I suspect their may be a EU rethink over the next few weeks.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:43 pm

Tusk - the 14 year old statesman.....

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:44 pm

Is the term "people's vote" because the people who want a "people's vote" are embarrassed to call it a second referendum? Or because they think people would be too stupid to realise it's a second referendum? I have no objection to anyone who wants to argue for another referendum, as is their right, but why the tweeness?

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:49 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:What disaster? 2 years? We haven't even exited yet, Please explain you can you leave the chips & alcohol out of it this time please, then the contents of my cranium might receive some pearls of wisdom. The referendum was the opportunity to let people make a decision, I presume you're not keen on the democracy thing. That's the only bit so far I've managed to get my head around.

Its an analogy the key point is that simply associating cause and effect to any two things just be cause they are connected is a stupid approach. It doesn't matter if that is the UK struggling and it being a member of the EU or someone being an alcoholic and liking chips the point is exactly the same.

I am keen on democracy but think referendums are a terrible idea. Whilst democracy is a good thing there are extreme circumstance where shooting yourself in the foot in the name of democracy is IMO not a good idea.

Unlike you I don't think of myself but look at the bigger picture and want whats best for us all as a country and the answer to that is scrap Brexit and continue/return as a member of the EU. Every sensible person with their eyes opened can see this and if we have to for a moment in time follow and undemocratic process to ensure a better world for us all then I think this is a price worth paying

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:51 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Don't think I'm not self aware.

They'll be those of you watching from the silent sidelines ( about 10 max!) Thinking "good for you lancs. Ignore the **** . Don't give him the oxygen he so craves"

I get it. I genuinely do.

However, how many times have various posters who have a different view to Lancaster Claret been left gob smacked by the real dismissive arrogance that he very quickly displays in many many of his sneering posts. So much so that they have to check his superiority and point out that they aren't stupid, they aren't backward and some how, inferior to him.

Even he saw the funny side of his pontificating pronouncement that he has an unfortunate habit of being right most of the time.

He's wrong and it really does seem to have hit a raw nerve. Particularly because it's the "Ringoeconomics" that's proven him to be. That ego of his is bruised and the fact he's refused to admit he's wrong proves it.

I feel sorry for him. Genuinely. At the end of the day he's a bright bloke and a claret to boot. Politics to one side I dare say we'd get on royally, over a pint, chewing over the post match talking points.

Give up on your schoolgirl obsession with Lancs its gone from amusing to cringeworthy. Have a beer and forget about him its over

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:06 pm

JohnMcGreal wrote:It's easy to forget this amid all the noise, but it's such an important point that bears repeating over and over again.

What the Leave campaign promised the general public in the 2016 referendum is undeliverable.

That is enough of a reason by itself to refer this back to the general public.

I spotted that dsr as well...the clear reluctance of some to do all they can, to avoid using the phrase 'second referendum'...it always make me smile..

John McGreal prefers the phrase above..'refer this back to the general public..'

WTF ?

Call it what it is man..have some conviction.

If there is another national vote, it will be a 'Second Referendum' irrespective of what the 'Remain' lot attempt to disguise it as.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:07 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:Its an analogy the key point is that simply associating cause and effect to any two things just be cause they are connected is a stupid approach. It doesn't matter if that is the UK struggling and it being a member of the EU or someone being an alcoholic and liking chips the point is exactly the same.

I am keen on democracy but think referendums are a terrible idea. Whilst democracy is a good thing there are extreme circumstance where shooting yourself in the foot in the name of democracy is IMO not a good idea.

Unlike you I don't think of myself but look at the bigger picture and want whats best for us all as a country and the answer to that is scrap Brexit and continue/return as a member of the EU. Every sensible person with their eyes opened can see this and if we have to for a moment in time follow and undemocratic process to ensure a better world for us all then I think this is a price worth paying

Come on, stop talking like a ***t, everybody's looking out for numero Uno & you're no different, at least let's be honest with each other that's not to much to ask is it!

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:10 pm

hampsteadclaret wrote:I spotted that dsr as well...the clear reluctance of some to do all they can, to avoid using the phrase 'second referendum'...it always make me smile..

John McGreal prefers the phrase above..'refer this back to the general public..'

WTF ?

Call it what it is man..have some conviction.

If there is another national vote, it will be a 'Second Referendum' irrespective of what the 'Remain' lot attempt to disguise it as.

I don't particularly care what it's called, but the public deserve the chance to have the final say on this fiasco.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:13 pm

JohnMcGreal wrote:It's easy to forget this amid all the noise, but it's such an important point that bears repeating over and over again.

What the Leave campaign promised the general public in the 2016 referendum is undeliverable.

That is enough of a reason by itself to refer this back to the general public.

Again, show me where the leave campaign used the word "promise"

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:16 pm

claretandy wrote:Again, show me where the leave campaign used the word "promise"

Are you pretending to be stupid, or are you for real?

ClaretCliff · Post by **ClaretCliff** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:19 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:And there you have it a man( if you can call him that!) Refusing point blank despite me holding out an olive branch on more than one occasion to show mutual respect to one another.

I'll never forget the post where Lancaster Claret , and in not quoting verbatim, said,
", I have the the unfortunate habit of being right and being right most of the time!!!!"

When confronted with the truth that shatters his pompous holier than pretty much every mortal, sneering and looking down his nose at any one that doesn't happen to share his world view. He's nothing more than a coward.

Well he's wrong and he knows he's wrong and it's plain for the dozen or so people who post on brexit related threads

Arrogant, myopic, supercilious coward.

Just quoting you ringo to make sure that Lancaster, having blocked you, doesn't miss this

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:20 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:Give up on your schoolgirl obsession with Lancs its gone from amusing to cringeworthy. Have a beer and forget about him its over

Thanks for the advice. I'll take it. Just do the same with lancs will you as he's blocked me! Tell him to just admit it when's he wrong and been proven that he's wrong. Even when it's me. The sky won't fall in.

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:21 pm

Watching Ringo try and get his ahead around how Lancasterclarets ‘block’ feature works kinda sums up this whole Brexit process in a way.

pureclaret · Post by **pureclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:21 pm

The public had there say 2 years ago, now its stand by the PM and allow her to finalise the 29th March, and then to move froward with with new trade deals around the world including Europe. To quote a previous post The public deserve democracy, that means that when we voted to leave as a Democratic country that was there say end of. We have to stand by that even if we dont like it.
I have just watched PM statement and think she has laid out what is needed. Now whilst we may not like it I believe any MP who does not support her should be considered to be anti democracy and should at the least resign from there post and be barred from politics.

To late now but in my opinion back when article 51 was actioned it should have been the best 2 or 3 negotiators from each major party to do the deal without any back stabbing etc, but cant happen now.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:25 pm

You all know that if it is given it's most correct name..'Second Referendum' there will be far less public support for it...large numbers of people who do not follow political events closely [who can blame them] will essentially say..'what's this for, we've already had one..?'

To be blunt/honest [and I know these are complex matters]..I have been disgusted by the ongoing attempts on the REMAIN side to ignore the results of that democratic vote, two years ago...Referendum Day plus one[24/6/2016]

- I probably shouldn't have been surprised....the rich, the powerful, the entitled..usually get their own way....however they will do it, they will ensure that what they want, will happen....History is littered with examples..[let's see]

Plenty of General Election results have not gone the way that I wanted, trust me on that one - the day after, everyone just gets on with it.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:41 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:I get all that Paul, i really do. People lose fortunes on the stock market all the time (and for balance I'm well aware that Soros made money out of Brexit as well)

My point is that a Brexit backer (someone who actually spent money to influence the Brexit decision) made money out of Brexit. That counts as an elite making money out of Brexit cos he won't have been alone. The investigations by both Bloomberg and Carole Cadewaller clearly show that to be the case.

I'm slightly irked that we can't get the figures for what % of elites wanted Brexit cos all the polls appear to split it in different ways. I'm quite happy to admit I'm wrong if I am btw, but we are concentrating on a pretty minor part of a very major problem going down this road!

Who was the brexit backer that made money out of the brexit vote? That sounds like a pretty "brave" gamble.

Investment managers using legal means to discover the probable outcome of an event, even if it is a political event, are doing what they are supposed to do. Nothing more and nothing less. Would you rather they withdrew all their investments for the period and your pensions and savings suffered as a result?

Apart from Weatherspoons and Dyson I'm not aware of any on the "ealthy list" that is a brexit supporter. I thought one of the arguments was that everyone who "knew best" voted remain?

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:43 pm

Don't think the name would change the way people think or vote, but wouldn't it actually be a 3rd referendum?

1. In 1975 - "Do you think that the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (the Common Market)?" Answer - yes, so no further action.
2. In 2016 Should we leave? Answer - yes
3. in 2019 How do we leave?

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:49 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Not sure how you can have two options for "remain" to be honest Paul.

Its either remain or it isn't!

So, Lancs, are you suggesting that if we were to stay in the EU nothing would change in the future?

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:51 pm

JohnMcGreal wrote:Are you pretending to be stupid, or are you for real?

So you can't, that's fine, just admit you're wrong.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:52 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Oh I see.

Right, with you now.

In any of the countries you've mentioned, how many of them have spent decades campaigning against the EU and blaming it for everything?

How long as the euro existed? That's an easy one to call - almost every country that adopted the euro has large numbers in their population wanting to turn the clock back.

But, I guess you know that, Lancs?

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:55 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Who was the brexit backer that made money out of the brexit vote? That sounds like a pretty "brave" gamble.

Investment managers using legal means to discover the probable outcome of an event, even if it is a political event, are doing what they are supposed to do. Nothing more and nothing less. Would you rather they withdrew all their investments for the period and your pensions and savings suffered as a result?

Apart from Weatherspoons and Dyson I'm not aware of any on the "ealthy list" that is a brexit supporter. I thought one of the arguments was that everyone who "knew best" voted remain?

I'd say Murdoch was the other obvious example (there's a fairly famous quote from when he was asked why he was anti-EU When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.')

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:55 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Don't think the name would change the way people think or vote, but wouldn't it actually be a 3rd referendum?

1. In 1975 - "Do you think that the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (the Common Market)?" Answer - yes, so no further action.
2. In 2016 Should we leave? Answer - yes
3. in 2019 How do we leave?

The EU in 2016 was a very different animal from the EEC in 1974. So while I would call the 2016 referendum the first and the 2019? one the second with the same question, you could validly argue they are the second and third with the proviso that the first and second were not asking the same question.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:59 pm

Again, show me where the leave campaign used the word "promise"

You mean in the advisory referendum?

Christ andy, give it up mate will you

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:00 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Okay, what is the % public support for a referendum on leaving the EU in all other 26 EU countries?

Hi Lancs, I'm curious. In the post above you quote "26 EU countries...." - and you've done it once before (at least) on this thread. Do you know something the rest of us don't? (No, that's not a rhetorical question). Which additional country has left the EU? Is RoI taking up the suggestion that they should leave alongside the UK?

EDIT: I've not included the "Tusk + 26 countries" quote in above.....

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:00 pm

dsr wrote:The EU in 2016 was a very different animal from the EEC in 1974. So while I would call the 2016 referendum the first and the 2019? one the second with the same question, you could validly argue they are the second and third with the proviso that the first and second were not asking the same question.

That's actually my point.
The question in 2019 would be a totally different question to that in 2016.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:03 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Hi Lancs, I'm curious. In the post above you quote "26 EU countries...." - and you've done it once before (at least) on this thread. Do you know something the rest of us don't? (No, that's not a rhetorical question). Which additional country has left the EU? Is RoI taking up the suggestion that they should leave alongside the UK?

I thought I'd answered that for Lancs earlier.
I assume he means Tusk (for Poland) also speaks for 26 other countries, in his role as President. So that's 27 + the UK.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:03 pm

Nothing sinister at all Paul, I'm just one country out in my calculations!

Fact is that they are united at the moment, and we are most certainly not.

Sorry Nil, genuine mistake on my part

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:03 pm

Claretnick wrote:Court of Session ruling allowing a case to be heard by the European Court of Justice for a ruling on how to revoke Article 50.

http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/9/ ... ing-the-EU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A bit more detail on this https://twitter.com/GeorgePeretzQC/stat ... 0122169344" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Could have a very significant impact on how things progress. If Article 50 can just be revoked and everything goes back to what it was then I'd say there's a possibility of that happening.

If re-entry has to be re-negotiated and we'd have to re-enter on less favourable terms I can't see people going for that.

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:07 pm

United, perhaps, in sheer disbelief at how this nightmare is getting worse by the week.

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:08 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:Come on, stop talking like a ***t, everybody's looking out for numero Uno & you're no different, at least let's be honest with each other that's not to much to ask is it!

Well if you really think everyone's just out for numero uno and doesn't put the plight of others before their own situation at times then that just about sums you up. I'm lucky to be in a position whereby the impact of things like Brexit and Tory austerity measures wont have that greater bearing on my life. Unfortunately I see a lot of struggling poor and vulnerable people who it does impact and my motives are driven by the impact we are having on them.

I even care about you despite the garbage you spout. I can see how people like JRM and Farage have got you in such a spin about immigrants and Polish duck thief's that you'll support their rhetoric and plans which will only serve to screw over yourself but nevertheless I will still champion the obvious solution to put an end to Brexit so you can live a better life

android · Post by **android** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:22 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Who was the brexit backer that made money out of the brexit vote? That sounds like a pretty "brave" gamble.

Investment managers using legal means to discover the probable outcome of an event, even if it is a political event, are doing what they are supposed to do. Nothing more and nothing less. Would you rather they withdrew all their investments for the period and your pensions and savings suffered as a result?

Apart from Weatherspoons and Dyson I'm not aware of any on the "ealthy list" that is a brexit supporter. I thought one of the arguments was that everyone who "knew best" voted remain?

Paul - Lancaster is taking about Crispin Odey. Effectively LC you are saying that Odey was so powerful he could back Leave with money and influence to a level of certainty of the outcome that he could make easy money out of the result. That would be incredible (and a big surprise to Odey I'm sure)! Paul is right and he's a gambler who thought he had got lucky on 23 June. As it happens his paper profits on 24 June were quickly wiped out and I believe he made huge losses in 2016 and 2017 so he is still waiting for his Brexit dividend. LC you want to believe this elite person made tons of money "out of Brexit" because it suits your narrative but it just is not the case.

Anyway more importantly Lancaster and Ringo need to make up!! I wish to play peacemaker with my 2 favourite posters!

Ringo - I think Lancs argument in answer to your question is this. If we pay say £15 bn to the EU and get say £5 bn back then ignoring all other side effects it costs us say £10bn a year as you say. But the argument is that of the £5bn that comes back lets say £10m goes to Burnley. You say that £10m could still go to Burnley. Lancs and others say those evil Tories would not give it to Burnley they would give it as a Christmas bonus to Jacob Rees Mogg's nanny or something like that. So the UK overall would be £10 bn better off as you say but Burnley would be £10m worse off and the nanny would be £10m better off.

So you are both right!!! Ringo has said you would probably get along over a beer and I'm sure he is right. Lancs and Ringo -put it behind you and move on for the sake of your fellow clarets!!

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:22 pm

Just seen May's speech, very impressive (for once).

She will have got some support with her robust style, and she spelt out better why she doesn't like Canada and Norway options (because the EU are offering Canada for GB not for the UK).

I suspect the breakthrough will come in the Irish Sea, because after all, Northern Ireland is a crucial part of the Union but not a big player in terms of the detail. I expect a fudge where the Canada+++ option is agreed but that N Ireland agrees to regulatory equivalence in some industries and that some checks will be carried out at ports between the rest of the UK and NI.

In one sense it could be an opportunity for business to relocate to NI in some instances and for others to relocate to the rest of the UK (or to set up separate subsidiaries). The key will be getting the DUP on board, but let's be honest, the billion pounds was hush money to a degree, they'll be told to get in line when it comes down to it.

I remain nervous, but she has ruled out Norway/EEA so unequivocally that Canada with a NI fudge is the only route I can see her taking.

Caballo · Post by **Caballo** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:23 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:I thought I'd answered that for Lancs earlier.
I assume he means Tusk (for Poland) also speaks for 26 other countries, in his role as President. So that's 27 + the UK.

Don't talk tripe nil, Lancs made a mistake, dsr pathetically jumped on it. You're equally pathetically trying to make up a back story for someone you perceive to be on your side of the divide.
Ringoesque!!

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:28 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Before:

After:

The referendum was "the single biggest expression of democracy, the UK has witnessed"
Ringo McCartney June 2016 - present.

"Let me also say this.The referendum was the largest democratic exercise this country has ever undergone."
Teresa May Friday 21st September 2018

It takes a while but eventually people catch up.......

android · Post by **android** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:30 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:The referendum was "the single biggest expression of democracy, the UK has witnessed"
Ringo McCartney June 2016 - present.

"Let me also say this.The referendum was the largest democratic exercise this country has ever undergone."
Teresa May Friday 21st September 2018

It takes a while but eventually people catch up.......

Good stuff Ringo.

But read my post 990 and shake hands with Lancaster please!

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:32 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:Well if you really think everyone's just out for numero uno and doesn't put the plight of others before their own situation at times then that just about sums you up. I'm lucky to be in a position whereby the impact of things like Brexit and Tory austerity measures wont have that greater bearing on my life. Unfortunately I see a lot of struggling poor and vulnerable people who it does impact and my motives are driven by the impact we are having on them.

I even care about you despite the garbage you spout. I can see how people like JRM and Farage have got you in such a spin about immigrants and Polish duck thief's that you'll support their rhetoric and plans which will only serve to screw over yourself but nevertheless I will still champion the obvious solution to put an end to Brexit so you can live a better life

Every life bears a story - do you not think there's a correlation between why rich people (mostly) voted remain & the people without predominantly voted leave, it doesn't Einstein's to work that out, I wish somebody would bring up the fishing thread as I never mentioned rustling ducks & this is the 2nd time my name has been associated with this.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:33 pm

Caballo wrote:Don't talk tripe nil, Lancs made a mistake, dsr pathetically jumped on it. You're equally pathetically trying to make up a back story for someone you perceive to be on your side of the divide.
Ringoesque!!

Nope. That's the way I read it. I tend to take things literally, and I thought Lancs was being pedantic by pointing out that (as EU President) Tusk speaks for another 26 nations - not just his own. In context this is actually what he was doing.
(This technically is the position).

Gerry Hattrick · Post by **Gerry Hattrick** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:37 pm

by JohnMcGreal » Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:10 pm

"I don't particularly care what it's called, but the public deserve the chance to have the final say on this fiasco."

We did - in 2016!! Pretty sure it was leave.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:44 pm

android wrote:Paul - Lancaster is taking about Crispin Odey. Effectively LC you are saying that Odey was so powerful he could back Leave with money and influence to a level of certainty of the outcome that he could make easy money out of the result. That would be incredible (and a big surprise to Odey I'm sure)! Paul is right and he's a gambler who thought he had got lucky on 23 June. As it happens his paper profits on 24 June were quickly wiped out and I believe he made huge losses in 2016 and 2017 so he is still waiting for his Brexit dividend. LC you want to believe this elite person made tons of money "out of Brexit" because it suits your narrative but it just is not the case.

Anyway more importantly Lancaster and Ringo need to make up!! I wish to play peacemaker with my 2 favourite posters!

Ringo - I think Lancs argument in answer to your question is this. If we pay say £15 bn to the EU and get say £5 bn back then ignoring all other side effects it costs us say £10bn a year as you say. But the argument is that of the £5bn that comes back lets say £10m goes to Burnley. You say that £10m could still go to Burnley. Lancs and others say those evil Tories would not give it to Burnley they would give it as a Christmas bonus to Jacob Rees Mogg's nanny or something like that. So the UK overall would be £10 bn better off as you say but Burnley would be £10m worse off and the nanny would be £10m better off.

So you are both right!!! Ringo has said you would probably get along over a beer and I'm sure he is right. Lancs and Ringo -put it behind you and move on for the sake of your fellow clarets!!

Sorry but that's not right.

Nil-desperandum said "Nil_desparandum said
" overwhelming evidence of EU investment in the local economy and jobs."

I said there was no such thing as EU "investment". Given that the UK is a net contributor to the EU. It was our money coming back.

"Christ on a bike Ringo. It's not!" Was Lancaster Clarets retort.

It was not about how money may be spent in the future

I asked him on several occasions to back his ascertion up. He refused. Simply choosing to post dismissive , holier than thou, posts and using "Ringoeconomics" "Ringoworld" and "Ringovision" as some kind of childish response.

I've given him lots of opportunity to day for a bit of adult mutual respect. But still he chose the ignoring technique. If he'd just held his hand up and said, in light of the irrefutable, independent ONS and Full Fact sourced evidence, that clearly shows accounted for UK tax payers funds, literally being sent back to the UK ,"actually, your right" I wouldn't have gloated or anything like that. Id have just said "fair play to ya" and respected him for it. But he simply chose to block me.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:45 pm

nil_desperandum wrote: Nope. That's the way I read it. I tend to take things literally, and I thought Lancs was being pedantic by pointing out that (as EU President) Tusk speaks for another 26 nations - not just his own. In context this is actually what he was doing.
(This technically is the position).

Lancasterclaret wrote:Nothing sinister at all Paul, I'm just one country out in my calculations!

Fact is that they are united at the moment, and we are most certainly not.

Sorry Nil, genuine mistake on my part

Hi nil_d,

There was no "Tusk" in the 2 x "26 countries" posts that I was refering to.

And, Lancs, has graciously acknowledged his (small) mistake.

I'm fine with that. None of us are perfect - and, for me, that refers to all people whichever side of the brexit debate they are on.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:46 pm

android wrote:Good stuff Ringo.

But read my post 990 and shake hands with Lancaster please!

Hey, even when they cant admit theyre wrong. I'll always shake hands with a fellow claret.