Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 10:58 am

Mala591 wrote:A good summary of current backstop options.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern- ... s-44615404" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am still convinced that a Northern Ireland only backstop (EU/UK trade border down the Irish sea) is the only solution that will work.

Anyone interested in discussing the pros and cons of a NI only backstop?

I don't really care if it's a NI only backstop if this moves the brexit process forward,however you neglect to mention the DUP in this process,they'll never expect anything that treats NI differently from the rest of the UK,also if NI is given special status you can bet your bottom dollar Blackford and Sturgeon will push for Scotland to have special status as well,and this is when the union could become fragmented.

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:04 am

Couple of potential cons to NI only backstop

1/ Break of the UK - If Scotland see NI keeping ties with EU they will demand Independence.
2/ Potential for Loyalist Paramilitaries to provoke violence and potentially take up arms.

I know to some Scotland, NI and the issues around the Irish Border dont matter much but we are one people and the govt should be representing all.

As an addition if this happens then the Tory's need to hang their heads in shame for wasting years that has cost millions and absolutely divided the country. In simple terms this will be a summary of what has happened

1 Vote to Leave EU
2 Tory's get into bed with DUP to maintain power after election car crash
3 EU suggest NI only backstop in Irish Sea
4 Tory's insist on all-UK backstop (cos beholden to DUP who wont support)
5 ERG wont support all-UK backstop
6 Years of going round in circles
7 Boris dumps his majority so DUP not important
8 Boris comes up with a genius idea that we can solve the backstop issue by putting the backstop in the Irish Sea
9 UK suggests NI backstop in Irish Sea to EU (see point 3)
10 EU scratch their heads and think what the f*ck have we been trying to work with for the last few years.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:21 am

CombatClaret wrote:People have accepted there will be negatives only after the result. The campaign was fought on the pretense that

"There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside" - Former Brexit Secretary

So it is right we continue on even though what some people likely voted for has turned out to be untrue?

If anyone wants to hold up their hand and say the heard that, believed it to be true and voted to leave on the back of it, then I'm quite happy to have a conversation with them about brexit being scrapped

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:25 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Again, you are making the "Colburn Claret mistake"

You assume everyone thinks like you, because most of the people you know think like you.

No. I would say the people I know are spilt fairly evenly. I am using my significant experience of working in a political environment to judge that revoking A50 without another referendum and having another referendum now would be seen as anti democratic by a significant majority of voters.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:26 am

taio wrote:I didn't say we don't need experts. I'm suggesting that over last three years the amount of conjecture has been phenomenal. And some of such conjecture has come from people who you would regard as experts - people who you regard as experts will be those who you happen to agree with. And the experts or lack of experts is not why we are in such a mess.

Okay

So lets look at it another way

Are you saying that all the plans being made by the government, business etc etc etc are all completely unnecessary because there isn't going to be significant disruption?

Or are you accepting the experts advice on these things, but not on others?

Yesterday was a case in point

Gove told everybody that the car industries he had met were "ready and prepared for No Deal Brexit"

The journalists who still do their jobs properly asked the car industries if that was true

None of them backed Gove, they said they had all done as much preparation as was possible, but that it was impossible to prepare for a No Deal Brexit because of what it actually entailed for their business.

Gove said what he said because he wants people to back his governments "No Deal" Brexit plan. It doesn't matter to him if its true or not. He doesn't want it stopped by inconvenient stuff like people suddenly realising that the government has been lying to them since Day One does he?

You can choose to believe the government who are simultaneously putting every hour under the sun in to preparing the country for a "No Deal" Brexit because they are well aware of the disruption it causes (and that its not possible to stop that happening to a greater or lesser extent) AND telling everyone there is nothing to worry about and that Brexit is still going to be great.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:28 am

summitclaret wrote:No. I would say the people I know are spilt fairly evenly. I am using my significant experience of working in a political environment to judge that revoking A50 without another referendum and having another referendum now would be seen as anti democratic by a significant majority of voters.

Based on any evidence other than your personal opinion?

I happen to be uncomfortable with revoking Article 50, but as the only alternative to a "No Deal" Brexit?

I'd back that.

But I want a deal first if at all possible.

Mala591 · Post by **Mala591** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:29 am

I agree with tiger and DA that there are numerous challenges and complications with a NI only backstop and I do understand why the DUP are worried about the potential isolation from the rest of the UK

BUT

imo these challenges/difficulties pale into insignificance compared with re-introducing a land border across Ireland. Surely the government can work with the DUP to reassure them - with new integration legislation if necessary - that a NI only backstop is the least disruptive option. Scottish independence is imo inevitable.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:31 am

summitclaret wrote:No. I would say the people I know are spilt fairly evenly. I am using my significant experience of working in a political environment to judge that revoking A50 without another referendum and having another referendum now would be seen as anti democratic by a significant majority of voters.

'You can't revoke Article 50 without holding a referendum! That's undemocratic!'

Ok, let's hold a referendum then.

'No! You can't hold a referendum! That's undemocratic as well!'

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:34 am

JohnMcGreal wrote:

'You can't revoke Article 50 without holding a referendum! That's undemocratic!'

Ok, let's hold a referendum then.

'No! You can't hold a referendum! That's undemocratic as well!'

A more informed referendum (which it would be) cannot be undemocratic.

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:35 am

If it be your will wrote:Honestly, if this can be healed at all, I think it will take decades. I'm not certain we've reached that point of no return yet, but watching Boris, this messageboard, and generally people I speak to, we must be close to it. Neither side is making even the slightest attempt to build bridges. Is it time to accept there is no compromise position here, and each side must instead seek victory? It could be, you know.

I've always been suspicious of the idea of "strong leadership" in a democracy, but I can see how it could be beneficial now for someone at the top acting in ways that bring people together.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:42 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:A more informed referendum (which it would be) cannot be undemocratic.

Yes but you know the question will be a fix.

Vote for a deal that traps us in the EU.

Vote for remain.

Great choice that is.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:46 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Okay

So lets look at it another way

Are you saying that all the plans being made by the government, business etc etc etc are all completely unnecessary because there isn't going to be significant disruption?

Or are you accepting the experts advice on these things, but not on others?

Yesterday was a case in point

Gove told everybody that the car industries he had met were "ready and prepared for No Deal Brexit"

The journalists who still do their jobs properly asked the car industries if that was true

None of them backed Gove, they said they had all done as much preparation as was possible, but that it was impossible to prepare for a No Deal Brexit because of what it actually entailed for their business.

Gove said what he said because he wants people to back his governments "No Deal" Brexit plan. It doesn't matter to him if its true or not. He doesn't want it stopped by inconvenient stuff like people suddenly realising that the government has been lying to them since Day One does he?

You can choose to believe the government who are simultaneously putting every hour under the sun in to preparing the country for a "No Deal" Brexit because they are well aware of the disruption it causes (and that its not possible to stop that happening to a greater or lesser extent) AND telling everyone there is nothing to worry about and that Brexit is still going to be great.

And if you want to doubt me, then this link to a government letter to the EU and the analysis given backs it up 100%

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/ ... 4342035456" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:47 am

Lowbankclaret wrote:Yes but you know the question will be a fix.

Vote for a deal that traps us in the EU.

Vote for remain.

Great choice that is.

I've no idea what will be on the ballot paper Lowbank, if it ever happens.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:48 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Based on any evidence other than your personal opinion?

I happen to be uncomfortable with revoking Article 50, but as the only alternative to a "No Deal" Brexit?

I'd back that.

But I want a deal first if at all possible.

And so do I.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:50 am

JohnMcGreal wrote:

'You can't revoke Article 50 without holding a referendum! That's undemocratic!'

Ok, let's hold a referendum then.

'No! You can't hold a referendum! That's undemocratic as well!'

I said now. If a GE leads to one then ok.

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:59 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:I've no idea what will be on the ballot paper Lowbank, if it ever happens.

Put whatever question you want down. It’s only advisory anyway.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 12:03 pm

Corbyn, giving another 3 billion away.

taio · Post by **taio** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 12:03 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Are you saying that all the plans being made by the government, business etc etc etc are all completely unnecessary because there isn't going to be significant disruption?

No I'm not saying that at all. If I was I'd be an hypocrite because I'm involved in Brexit business contingency planning at work.

You've just switched the discussion and made up a point I wasnt making.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 12:04 pm

Opps sorry, 2 billion a year.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 12:21 pm

AndrewJB wrote:Considering the vote was overall fifty-two-something to forty-seven, all the constituencies that voted to leave had sizable remain votes. if you produce a map of Britain with constituencies coloured in how they voted it won't give you a truly accurate picture of the country. This is the reality of where we are. I think it would be more interesting to get your opinion on how the country could be brought back together.

if you were in overall charge, and the EU were fairly compliant, how would you play it? How would you bring the country together to move forward? I'm not asking to try to get you shot down - although you (we all) have to allow for some valid criticism of what you say (and I'll do my own version for you to critique too).

The whole conversation has gone into that awful polar opposite thing where the centre ground has disappeared. This is a mere football messageboard, but it would be interesting to try to find the middle ground here.

How to bring the country back together?

Implement the "once in a generation" largest single expression of democracy this nation has ever witnessed.

Europhiles would be quote free to campaign to rejoin the EU in a open and fair democracy.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 12:37 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:A more informed referendum (which it would be) cannot be undemocratic.

You dont think the 2016 Peoples Vote was "informed"!?

You missed to numerous, head to head, tv debates.

You failed to read any of the miles of column inches devoted to the subject.?

You weren't any where near a television when the news and current affairs programmes were reporting on the pro and con arguments?

Your radio ran out of batteries denying you access to any pre referendum debate?

You never posted on brexit related threads on Clarets mad!?

All of the above went on for around 2 years leading upto the vote

You did not receive the booklet that went to every single household in the land , that explained what leaving the EU meant?

Pull the other one.....

Another referendum in itself is not undemocratic. But to have another before the first is actually implemented is.

Remoaners have not accepted the result of the 2016 Peoples Vote. Why should brexiteers believe them when they claim theyd accept another Leave vote?

Swinson admitted she wouldn't.

And if Remain won as a brexiteer I'd expect the best of 5 5,7,....

Why should I as a brexiteer have to win TWO referenda for my views to be actually implemented, where as you as a remoaner would only need to have ONE.

That effectively means a Leave vote is worth half that of a Remain.

Plus, we constantly here, "the referendum has caused division and uncertainty "

Explain to me how you believe having another will actually bring to an end "division and uncertainty"?

The genie is out of the bottle.

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 12:42 pm

WOW! I can't believe the population of the UK is 67.6 Million.

I thought it was 17.4 Million!

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 12:50 pm

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:WOW! I can't believe the population of the UK is 67.6 Million.

I thought it was 17.4 Million!

Looks like you've got some top researching skills there!

Perhaps if you were to explore , "eligible voters" "registered voters" and "legal minimum age" things would become a little more clearer.

Good luck.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:28 pm

No one needs informing more than you Ringo.

You are repeating the same stuff that is untrue now as it was in 2016.

But you won't change your mind whatever. I get that.

But for the millions who look at the last three years, and take in even bits of it, they are massively more informed than they were then.

I've no idea which way it will go, whether its a good or a bad thing, but I do know one thing, if the GE doesn't solve this impasse, then there is only one other way out of this.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:45 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:Yes but you know the question will be a fix.

Vote for a deal that traps us in the EU.

Vote for remain.

Great choice that is.

We've done this to death, and we can't be certain what will be on the paper, but its pretty obvious what should be on:
Question 1.
Do you wish to leave the EU on (set date) ? YES/ NO

Question 2.
If a simple majority vote to leave, do you wish the UK to leave:
A With the deal negotiated or
B with no deal

Please circle YES or NO and also tick the box for A or B.

It's simply worded and gives equal weight to all options

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:54 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:No one needs informing more than you Ringo.

You are repeating the same stuff that is untrue now as it was in 2016.

But you won't change your mind whatever. I get that.

But for the millions who look at the last three years, and take in even bits of it, they are massively more informed than they were then.

I've no idea which way it will go, whether its a good or a bad thing, but I do know one thing, if the GE doesn't solve this impasse, then there is only one other way out of this.

That would depend on the manifestos and the make up post the GE. If it is still not clear there would could be scenario where there us a referendum on wjich way to leave wuth no remain option. Something that I have wondered about for a while.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 2:05 pm

summitclaret wrote:That would depend on the manifestos and the make up post the GE. If it is still not clear there would could be scenario where there us a referendum on wjich way to leave wuth no remain option. Something that I have wondered about for a while.

As I said to Sidney, you would using the 2016 electoral role for a 2019 referendum.

Not even remotely democratic

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 2:08 pm

There should be another vote simply because the electorate were lied to by Boris, Gove and Farage. The £350million extra (each week) promise for the NHS was pure deception. They should have been prosecuted.

But there has been a further 3 years of information and we should all be given the chance to vote again.

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 2:40 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:We've done this to death, and we can't be certain what will be on the paper, but its pretty obvious what should be on:
Question 1.
Do you wish to leave the EU on (set date) ? YES/ NO

Question 2.
If a simple majority vote to leave, do you wish the UK to leave:
A With the deal negotiated or
B with no deal

Please circle YES or NO and also tick the box for A or B.

It's simply worded and gives equal weight to all options

That second question is not fair for 2 reasons. First if 2A won we are in a worse position now as regards discussions with the EU. Secondly 2B gas no chance as no remain voters would back it.

Ir would be better to stick to a simple leave or remain with the leave option defined along the following lines

a canada style free trade deal but if the EU won't agree one within x months we leave with no WA.

Darthlaw · Post by **Darthlaw** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 2:40 pm

LoveCurryPies wrote:There should be another vote simply because the electorate were lied to by Boris, Gove and Farage. The £350million extra (each week) promise for the NHS was pure deception. They should have been prosecuted.

But there has been a further 3 years of information and we should all be given the chance to vote again.

And the emergency budget the public were threatened with, or better still the ultimate porky "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide."

Lies on both sides, unfortunately.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 2:49 pm

Is a no-deal Brexit just a money making scam for the chums of Boris?

https://twitter.com/Robert___Harris/sta ... 1772647424" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 4:06 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:We've done this to death, and we can't be certain what will be on the paper, but its pretty obvious what should be on:
Question 1.
Do you wish to leave the EU on (set date) ? YES/ NO

Question 2.
If a simple majority vote to leave, do you wish the UK to leave:
A With the deal negotiated or
B with no deal

Please circle YES or NO and also tick the box for A or B.

It's simply worded and gives equal weight to all options

No sane country would ever give its people the option to effectively commit harakiri on a huge economic scale. But we haven't been a sane country for a good while, so maybe a no-deal Brexit will end up on the ballot.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 4:30 pm

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:WOW! I can't believe the population of the UK is 67.6 Million.

I thought it was 17.4 Million!

And nearly a million and a half of those are now dead.

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:03 pm

Spijed wrote:Is a no-deal Brexit just a money making scam for the chums of Boris?

https://twitter.com/Robert___Harris/sta ... 1772647424" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I see this is the latest conspiracy theory getting the #FBPE crowd frothing at the mouth.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:03 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:We've done this to death, and we can't be certain what will be on the paper, but its pretty obvious what should be on:
Question 1.
Do you wish to leave the EU on (set date) ? YES/ NO

Question 2.
If a simple majority vote to leave, do you wish the UK to leave:
A With the deal negotiated or
B with no deal

Please circle YES or NO and also tick the box for A or B.

It's simply worded and gives equal weight to all options

I would be very happy if that was how it was structured.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:08 pm

JohnMcGreal wrote:No sane country would ever give its people the option to effectively commit harakiri on a huge economic scale. But we haven't been a sane country for a good while, so maybe a no-deal Brexit will end up on the ballot.

That there is the hitting the nail on the head.

This country is going to stop Brexit at any cost.

Any illusion I had that the vote would be acted on evaporated in the last few weeks.

It’s looking like a deal behind the scenes means the next extension will be for 6 months.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:20 pm

CombatClaret wrote:And nearly a million and a half of those are now dead.

If the result of a general election had not been implemented after 3 and a 1/2 years. If some of those whod voted had passed away would it mean that the result was any less valid and the result shouldn't be implemented.

You certainly dont do democracy, but you do sickening ghoulish glee I'll give you that.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:26 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:That there is the hitting the nail on the head.

This country is going to stop Brexit at any cost.

Any illusion I had that the vote would be acted on evaporated in the last few weeks.

It’s looking like a deal behind the scenes means the next extension will be for 6 months.

No. Our sovereign parliament will prevent a no-deal crash out at any cost, not Brexit itself.

I'm almost certain that there will be another referendum in the not-too-distant future, giving the public a clear choice between a credible leave option (a deal) or remaining as a full member.

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:31 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:If the result of a general election had not been implemented after 3 and a 1/2 years. If some of those whod voted had passed away would it mean that the result was any less valid and the result shouldn't be implemented.

You certainly dont do democracy, but you do sickening ghoulish glee I'll give you that.

Do you see any smileys or a 'lol' after that simple statement of fact?

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:39 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:No one needs informing more than you Ringo.

You are repeating the same stuff that is untrue now as it was in 2016.

But you won't change your mind whatever. I get that.

But for the millions who look at the last three years, and take in even bits of it, they are massively more informed than they were then.

I've no idea which way it will go, whether its a good or a bad thing, but I do know one thing, if the GE doesn't solve this impasse, then there is only one other way out of this.

You can always rely on Lancasterclaret for some Obrianesque sneering when he's lost the arguement.

To say people weren't informed when they voted. Despite 2 years of wall to wall coverage is just the democracy deniers shorthand for - "You didn't know what you were voting for!"

And the self awareness lacking bare faced hypocrisy, of you saying I'm repeating the same stuff and I wont change my mind. Really is a thing to behold!

1 Remoaners have not accepted the result of the 2016 Peoples Vote. Why should brexiteers believe them when they claim theyd accept another Leave vote?

2 Why should I as a brexiteer have to win TWO referenda for my views to be actually implemented, where as you as a remoaner would only need to have ONE.

3 we constantly here, "the referendum has caused division and uncertainty "

Please explain to me how you believe having another will actually bring to an end "division and uncertainty"?

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:41 pm

CombatClaret wrote:Do you see any smileys or a 'lol' after that simple statement of fact?

Rather than trying to be a poor man's Polly Toynbee try answering the question!

If the result of a general election had not been implemented after 3 and a 1/2 years. If some of those whod voted had passed away, would it mean that the result was any less valid and the result shouldn't be implemented.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:44 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:As I said to Sidney, you would using the 2016 electoral role for a 2019 referendum.

Not even remotely democratic

It's more democratic than ignoring and trying to usurp the result for three and a half years.........

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 5:48 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Rather than trying to be a poor man's Polly Toynbee try answering the question!

If the result of a general election had not been implemented after 3 and a 1/2 years. If some of those whod voted had passed away, would it mean that the result was any less valid and the result shouldn't be implemented.

The result of a general election implemented as the results are announced, I.e. the candidate with the most votes becomes the MP for a constituency. It could never be delayed more than a few hours, maybe a couple of days for recounts.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:10 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:It's more democratic than ignoring and trying to usurp the result for three and a half years.........

It isn't at all.

But you know that

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:13 pm

martin_p wrote:The result of a general election implemented as the results are announced, I.e. the candidate with the most votes becomes the MP for a constituency. It could never be delayed more than a few hours, maybe a couple of days for recounts.

Correct. I said "if"

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:16 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:Correct. I said "if"

I know you said if, but if is an impossibility so it renders the analogy useless. Your consistent mistake is that you keep comparing referendums to other types of elections but they just aren’t the same thing.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:24 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:It isn't at all.

But you know that

The above post is a revealing example of how a remoaners mind works. !!

Its better to entirely ignore the result of a referendum that was based on , then , current electoral.

Than to have one on based a 3 1/2 year old one. That if you're so confident that the same voters are "better informed" and over a million have died. You wouldn't want to still base it on the same electoral roll!

Anyway, the 3 questions that as per usual you're choosing to ignore.

1 Remoaners have not accepted the result of the 2016 Peoples Vote. Why should brexiteers believe them when they claim theyd accept another Leave vote?

2 Why should I as a brexiteer have to win TWO referenda for my views to be actually implemented, where as you as a remoaner would only need to have ONE.

3 we constantly here, "the referendum has caused division and uncertainty "

Please explain to me how you believe having another will actually bring to an end "division and uncertainty"?

I predict I'm going to see Lancasterclarets favourite trick.

The old "I've already answered you Ringo" method of answer avoiding!

5...4....3....2....1....

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:27 pm

martin_p wrote:I know you said if, but if is an impossibility so it renders the analogy useless. Your consistent mistake is that you keep comparing referendums to other types of elections but they just aren’t the same thing.

They have one very basic thing in Common. They are both expressions of democracy.

Can you tell me when the last expression of UK wide democracy was not implemented Marty?

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:32 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:They have one very basic thing in Common. They are both expressions of democracy.

Can you tell me when the last expression of UK wide democracy was not implemented Marty?

Yes, both my son and my wife wanted to eat out at a particular cafe at lunchtime but we didn’t go.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:40 pm

Ringo

You know what I say to you now is surely?

You don't read my posts.

If you did, you'd know that I want a deal.

But if we can't get one, and there isn't a democratic mandate for a "No Deal", then we need a way out.

What deal do you want Ringo?

You seem very keen on repeating the latest Brexit buzzwords but never seem to mention what deal u want?