Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[TVC15]

No.

So there is evidence then that Brexit has resulted in financial losses and job losses ?

[RingoMcCartney]

You're in danger of falling into your own trap. I'm giving you actual facts of things that have actually happened because of Brexit. But you dismiss them because you hold an opinion that they might be short term. Where's your evidence? Offices are being moved, jobs relocated, no more tax from those jobs for HMRC. It's costing us money now.

For the 7TH time!

I HAVE NO EVIDENCE! Just an opinion that in time they may prove to be short term.

Where's your EVIDENCE they won't. It's simply your opinion.

You're a weather girl thinking your a climatologist.

[Lancasterclaret]

I'm liking this latest attempt to ignore reality by saying everything is an "opinion". Even when it isn't.

[TVC15]

Wrongo - you do realise that when things have happened that constitutes evidence and when it’s yet to happen that is an opinion.
You are being told things that have happened - why do you think that’s still an opinion ?

[RingoMcCartney]

So there is evidence then that Brexit has resulted in financial losses and job losses ?

We have not left the European Union YET.

They're business contingency plans that may prove to be short term. Are you saying whatever is done today is totally irreversible? Are you saying that any financial impact or loss of jobs in the UK which employers have put down to the uncertainty or anticipation of Brexit. Will be more than compensated by a post brexit boom. I have no "evidence" They will. Just an opinion.

Either way you have no "evidence" that brexit will have a negative on the uk economy. 

Just like me, you only have an opinion. Nothing more. Nothing less.

[Lancasterclaret]

To be fair to Ringo, Lord Digby Jones basically is saying the same thing about the job losses every week that he is on Radio Five. Even when confronted with the evidence, he says its nothing to do with Brexit.

[RingoMcCartney]

I'm liking this latest attempt to ignore reality by saying everything is an "opinion". Even when it isn't.

The only fact is this.

No country has left the EU before.

A country with the 5th/6th biggest GDP in the world.

WE HAVE NOT LEFT YET.

There is no "evidence"

Just opinions saying brexit will be either negative, positive or neutral.

Till it happens I, nor any Ceaseless Remoaner, have or can have "evidence"

Just conjecture and opinions based on assumptions, projections, scenarios given varying criteria, predictions, assumption, forecasts and short termism.

[TVC15]

We have not left the European Union YET.

They're business contingency plans that may prove to be short term. Are you saying whatever is done today is totally irreversible? Are you saying that any financial impact or loss of jobs in the UK which employers have put down to the uncertainty or anticipation of Brexit. Will be more than compensated by a post brexit boom. I have no "evidence" They will. Just an opinion.

Either way you have no "evidence" that brexit will have a negative on the uk economy. 

Just like me, you only have an opinion. Nothing more. Nothing less.

We are being told that money is being lost and jobs lost because of firstly the uncertainty of Brexit and secondly in anticipation of Brexit happening....so that is factual evidence of the negative impact of the thing that is Brexit -ie it would not have happened without Brexit - irrespective of whether Brexit has taken place or not.

If a company says it will be winding down and closing in 12 months and starts to lay off its staff are those redundancies evidence of the impact of the closure or an opinion ? The company has not been closed yet but under your weird use of the language it’s an opinion - even though it’s happened

[CombatClaret]

edited

[TVC15]

To be fair Wrongo is saying he is not saying that - so fair to assume he admits that there has been financial and job losses
Unless of course he has read the question incorrectly - in which case you are correct - he’s in denial

Either way he looks a drongo.

[NCClaret]

The way the EU has developed since 1975 has been one of an inextricable rise towards greater Europe federalism. This continues to this day and the problem for the UK is that we have never been comfortable with that and never wanted it. Brexit has, in some degree lanced this boil. There will never be a clear nor substantial majority who will embrace the EU. Regardless of how Remainers try to paint the EU as democratic – it isn’t. Some will say the UK isn’t either – well, more so than the EU and certainly the establishment is more accountable through our Parliamentary system.
To those who foretell of great gloom and disaster post Brexit; do they have the same approach in their own lives, in work etc. when crises happen … do they simply see capitulation as the order of the day and take the least line of resistance. Despite a clear majority voting Brexit, we now seem so in thrall and subservient to the EU that many have lost all resolve to forge whatever path is placed in front of us? A frightening lack of resolve permeates through all walks of our lives at the moment.
Knife crime has risen … gangs are out of control … The Clarets have not signed anyone … the ability to face up to whatever crises impact on us personally and corporately will, as always, be defined by resolve and that resolve or lack of it will define us going forward.

[Lancasterclaret]

You do realise that you saying the EU is undemocratic does not make it undemocratic right?

I mean, you are all doing it, just repeating the same lies time and time again does not make it fact.

[RingoMcCartney]

To be fair Wrongo is saying he is not saying that - so fair to assume he admits that there has been financial and job losses
Unless of course he has read the question incorrectly - in which case you are correct - he’s in denial

Either way he looks a drongo.

A plane takes off. The passengers experience some short term turbulence.

"That's evidence that we're going to crash!!!!!!!" Scream the hysterical Remoaners on their way to Eutopia.

[aggi]

Yes.

UK Governments happily doing the bidding of appointed Eurocrats.

I know you'll disagree. We've been here many many times.

My opinion hasn't changed. Doubt yours has.

I didn't expect it to have changed, I was just wondering how you were reconciling the fact that you were blaming the UK government with it being the EU's fault.

You haven't really explained why you suddenly think UK governments will get better post-Brexit. If they're willing to do the bidding of Eurocrats at the moment then aren't you just going to see them doing the bidding of the US or whoever next?

[RingoMcCartney]

We are being told that money is being lost and jobs lost because of firstly the uncertainty of Brexit and secondly in anticipation of Brexit happening....so that is factual evidence of the negative impact of the thing that is Brexit -ie it would not have happened without Brexit - irrespective of whether Brexit has taken place or not.

If a company says it will be winding down and closing in 12 months and starts to lay off its staff are those redundancies evidence of the impact of the closure or an opinion ? The company has not been closed yet but under your weird use of the language it’s an opinion - even though it’s happened

Is it possible that the space created by one firm closing allows one to take its place, flourish and become larger than its predecessor?

Overall it's a positive.

I have no "evidence" it will happen. Nor, for that matter do you, that it cant or won't. But, in your weird use of language it's "evidence" of the negative impact of Brexit.

[Lancasterclaret]

Weird or not, it is evidence of the effects of Brexit.

I just hope that we avoid it up here (though again, that looks very unlikely)

[RingoMcCartney]

I didn't expect it to have changed, I was just wondering how you were reconciling the fact that you were blaming the UK government with it being the EU's fault.

You haven't really explained why you suddenly think UK governments will get better post-Brexit.?

An unnecessary and distant layer of politicians being taken out of the sphere of influence, means less opportunity for British MPS to buck pass. Instead they will be more accountable and have to get on with the bloody job they're paid to do.

[RingoMcCartney]

Weird or not, it is evidence of the effects of Brexit.

I just hope that we avoid it up here (though again, that looks very unlikely)

Clarets concede a penalty within minutes of the game starting.

Before the pen taker even steps up.-

"It's "evidence" of an inevitable crushing defeat!!!!!" Scream the confidence lacking Remoaners

[Lancasterclaret]

So we are back to the football comparisons.

Ace.

[claret2018]

"Instead they will be more accountable and have to get on with the bloody job they're paid to do."

Because they're doing a fabulous job of that at the moment...

[TVC15]

Whilst you have the dictionary out why don’t you look up the meaning of “outcome”.

Funniest thing is you actually believe you are correct

[Burnley Ace]

FOR THE 6TH TIME.

I HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

I ONLY HAVE AN OPINION.

YOU HAVE NO, ZERO, NADA OR ZILCH EVIDENCE

YOU ONLY HAVE AN OPINION. ( based on assumptions, projections, scenarios given varying criteria, predictions, assumptions and forecasts.)

Let’s just take point 1 - “less free trade with the EU” - now to have free trade there needs to be a free trade agreement, we don’t have a free trade agreement so that is evidence (the available body of facts indicating a belief is true) not opinion. Perhaps you can explain how that is an opinion?

Point 6 - at the moment we have input and agree the standards, when we leave we won’t. How is that not a negative? Yes we trade with other countries on their standards but we have never been in a position to influence their standards. That’s evidence of a negative aspect unless you think that having no influence is comparable to or better than having influence?

Point 9 - it is a fact that atm we don’t have the legal ability to share information or participate in the EAW. The evidence is the absence of any enabling legislation. Unless you are trying to argue that data sharing for security isn’t a positive then not having that ability is a negative.

11 and 12 - we won’t be in the eu (fact) we won’t have access to those funds (fact) that’s evidence of a negative not an opinion

[Damo]

Brexit will result in job losses. Just like being in the EU has resulted in job losses.
You lot have had two years to convince us that Brexit is a bad idea and all you can come up with is to say that it will be just as bad as it has been for years

[Lancasterclaret]

Well no, the whole argument will be that there will be more job losses and less jobs created.

I do notice that no one is any longer trying to convince us that Brexit will usher in a new period of prosperity for all.

Which does beg the question for those of us who still have to work and earn cash, why on earth are we doing it?

So Colburn can live the rest of his life, free of all those EU rules that have shackled him?

[Burnley Ace]

Clarets concede a penalty within minutes of the game starting.

Before the pen taker even steps up.-

"It's "evidence" of an inevitable crushing defeat!!!!!" Scream the confidence lacking Remoaners

That is evidence that the opposition will have a penalty. Regardless of whether they score or not, is it a positive or a negative to have a penalty? Most people would suggest it’s a positive to team that it’s given to.

If you were to look at all the available facts (historical statistics) it would provide evidence that a penalty is more likely to lead to a goal than a miss or does it just provide an opinion?

[RingoMcCartney]

So we are back to the football comparisons.

Ace.

It's a football based message board. I assumed it may have helped you lot understand that you only have opinions not "evidence".

No doubt you'll see it as gold plated evidence of my losing the argument.

[RingoMcCartney]

That is evidence that the opposition will have a penalty. Regardless of whether they score or not, is it a positive or a negative to have a penalty? Most people would suggest it’s a positive to team that it’s given to.

If you were to look at all the available facts (historical statistics) it would provide evidence that a penalty is more likely to lead to a goal than a miss or does it just provide an opinion?

Now who mentioned remedial!?

Try and get your confused little head, the idea of a team being awarded a penalty , is not "evidence"of the team that conceded it definitely going to lose the game.

Do I need to provide crayons?

Christ. I can see why you voted Remain!

[DocFoster]

Got to love this. A true man of his word is Jeremy.

Jeremy speaking during the 2009 Irish Referendum (2nd one) to sign up to the Lisbon Treaty.

https://www.theredroar.com/2019/02/excl ... d-footage/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A Little reminder what the aim of the Lisbon Treaty was/is:

The stated aim of the treaty was to "complete the process started by the Treaty of Amsterdam [1997] and by the Treaty of Nice [2001] with a view to enhancing the efficiency and democratic legitimacy of the Union and to improving the coherence of its action".[4] Opponents of the Treaty of Lisbon, such as former Danish Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Jens-Peter Bonde, argued that it would centralize the EU,[5] and weaken democracy by "moving power away" from national electorates.[6] Supporters argue that it brings more checks and balances into the EU system, with stronger powers for the European Parliament and a new role for national parliaments.

Negotiations to modify EU institutions began in 2001, resulting first in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, which would have repealed the existing European treaties and replaced them with a "constitution". Although ratified by a majority of member states, this was abandoned after being rejected by 54.67% of French voters on 29 May 2005[7][8] and then by 61.54% of Dutch voters on 1 June 2005.[9] After a "period of reflection", member states agreed instead to maintain the existing treaties, but to amend them, salvaging a number of the reforms that had been envisaged in the constitution. An amending "reform" treaty was drawn up and signed in Lisbon in 2007. It was originally intended to have been ratified by all member states by the end of 2008. This timetable failed, primarily due to the initial rejection of the Treaty in June 2008 by the Irish electorate, a decision which was reversed in a second referendum in October 2009 after Ireland secured a number of concessions related to the treaty.

[Burnley Ace]

Now who mentioned remedial!?

Try and get your confused little head, the idea of a team being awarded a penalty , is not "evidence"of the team that conceded it definitely going to lose the game.

Do I need to provide crayons?

Christ. I can see why you voted Remain!

Where have I written that the team that conceded is definitely going to lose the game?

[summitclaret]

Well Tusk is not a happy boy today is he? I wonder if he is concerned that Merkel may be about to undermine him?

[RingoMcCartney]

Let’s just take point 1 - “less free trade with the EU” - now to have free trade there needs to be a free trade agreement, we don’t have a free trade agreement so that is evidence (the available body of facts indicating a belief is true) not opinion. Perhaps you can explain how that is an opinion?

I agree It's "evidence" that we don't CURRENTLY have a free trade deal with the EU. What "evidence" do you have that we won't. And how is not currently having a free trade deal "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk? It's not its conjecture, it's an opinion.

Point 6 - at the moment we have input and agree the standards, when we leave we won’t. How is that not a negative? Yes we trade with other countries on their standards but we have never been in a position to influence their standards. That’s evidence of a negative aspect unless you think that having no influence is comparable to or better than having influence?

It's not. It's an opinion based on an assumption. It's not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk.

Point 9 - it is a fact that atm we don’t have the legal ability to share information or participate in the EAW. The evidence is the absence of any enabling legislation. Unless you are trying to argue that data sharing for security isn’t a positive then not having that ability is a negative.

It's not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk economy

11 and 12 - we won’t be in the eu (fact) we won’t have access to those funds (fact) that’s evidence of a negative not an opinion

As a contributor to the EU by around 20 billion each and every year. The FACT that some of it used to come back but wont after we leave may be seen as a negative. The fact that our total contribution will now be ours to spend is not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk.

FOR THE 8TH TIME.

I HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

YOU ONLY HAVE AN OPINION

I ONLY HAVE AN OPINION.

[RingoMcCartney]

Let’s just take point 1 - “less free trade with the EU” - now to have free trade there needs to be a free trade agreement, we don’t have a free trade agreement so that is evidence (the available body of facts indicating a belief is true) not opinion. Perhaps you can explain how that is an opinion?

Point 6 - at the moment we have input and agree the standards, when we leave we won’t. How is that not a negative? Yes we trade with other countries on their standards but we have never been in a position to influence their standards. That’s evidence of a negative aspect unless you think that having no influence is comparable to or better than having influence?

Point 9 - it is a fact that atm we don’t have the legal ability to share information or participate in the EAW. The evidence is the absence of any enabling legislation. Unless you are trying to argue that data sharing for security isn’t a positive then not having that ability is a negative.

11 and 12 - we won’t be in the eu (fact) we won’t have access to those funds (fact) that’s evidence of a negative not an opinion

1I agree It's "evidence" that we don't CURRENTLY have a free trade deal with the EU. What "evidence" do you have that we won't. And how is not currently having a free trade deal "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk? It's not its conjecture, it's an opinion.

6 It's not. It's an opinion based on an assumption. It's not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk.

9It's not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk economy 


11 and 12 As a contributor to the EU by around 20 billion each and every year. The FACT that some of it used to come back but wont after we leave may be seen as a negative. The fact that our total contribution will now be ours to spend is not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk. 

FOR THE 8TH TIME. 

I HAVE NO EVIDENCE. 

YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE. 

YOU ONLY HAVE AN OPINION 

I ONLY HAVE AN OPINION.

[RingoMcCartney]

"Instead they will be more accountable and have to get on with the bloody job they're paid to do."

Because they're doing a fabulous job of that at the moment...

They most certainly aren't!

[Burnley Ace]

As a contributor to the EU by around 20 billion each and every year. The FACT that some of it used to come back but wont after we leave may be seen as a negative. The fact that our total contribution will now be ours to spend is not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk.

FOR THE 8TH TIME.

I HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

YOU ONLY HAVE AN OPINION

I ONLY HAVE AN OPINION.

Are my responses getting too long for you or are they just too specific?

Though I am glad you accepted that not receiving money from those specific funds “may be seen” as a negative. You asked for evidence of negatives, I provided evidence and you agree!!! That’s a first:-)

[Burnley Ace]

1I agree It's "evidence" that we don't CURRENTLY have a free trade deal with the EU. What "evidence" do you have that we won't. And how is not currently having a free trade deal "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk? It's not its conjecture, it's an opinion.

6 It's not. It's an opinion based on an assumption. It's not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk.

9It's not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk economy 


11 and 12 As a contributor to the EU by around 20 billion each and every year. The FACT that some of it used to come back but wont after we leave may be seen as a negative. The fact that our total contribution will now be ours to spend is not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk. 

FOR THE 8TH TIME. 

I HAVE NO EVIDENCE. 

YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE. 

YOU ONLY HAVE AN OPINION 

I ONLY HAVE AN OPINION.

1. The evidence we don’t have a free trade deal is that we haven’t started negotiations!! Are you now trying to pretend that not having a free trade deal is better than having a free trade deal? What evidence do you need, use google!!

6. It is evidence (the available body of facts indicating whether a proposition is true). Are you really trying to argue that not having influence is better than having influence?

9. It is evidence that it will have a negative impact on the U.K. why have you included the word “economy”?

[RingoMcCartney]

Are my responses getting too long for you or are they just too specific?

No! As can be seen the technology let me down.

[scouseclaret]

Ringo - if you have no facts or evidence, can I ask what you base your opinion on?

[RingoMcCartney]

Though I am glad you accepted that not receiving money from those specific funds “may be seen” as a negative. You asked for evidence of negatives, I provided evidence and you agree!!! That’s a first:-)

You provided me with an example of an opinion. An opinion that fails to understand the terms "the uk paid more in than it got out!"

I said you may be remedial.

I'm starting to think I was being too generous.

[RingoMcCartney]

Ringo - if you have no facts or evidence, can I ask what you base your opinion on?

Other people's opinions. My experiences. TV , radio reading.

And evidence and facts that are based on events that have ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

NOT GOING TO HAPPEN and not on assumptions, projections, scenarios given varying criteria, predictions, assumptions and forecasts and short termism.

[Taffy on the wing]

The way the EU has developed since 1975 has been one of an inextricable rise towards greater Europe federalism. This continues to this day and the problem for the UK is that we have never been comfortable with that and never wanted it. Brexit has, in some degree lanced this boil. There will never be a clear nor substantial majority who will embrace the EU. Regardless of how Remainers try to paint the EU as democratic – it isn’t. Some will say the UK isn’t either – well, more so than the EU and certainly the establishment is more accountable through our Parliamentary system.
To those who foretell of great gloom and disaster post Brexit; do they have the same approach in their own lives, in work etc. when crises happen … do they simply see capitulation as the order of the day and take the least line of resistance. Despite a clear majority voting Brexit, we now seem so in thrall and subservient to the EU that many have lost all resolve to forge whatever path is placed in front of us? A frightening lack of resolve permeates through all walks of our lives at the moment.
Knife crime has risen … gangs are out of control … The Clarets have not signed anyone … the ability to face up to whatever crises impact on us personally and corporately will, as always, be defined by resolve and that resolve or lack of it will define us going forward.

Oh God!.......Not the stiff upper lip again.
Never mind that the populace was lied to repeatedly about the benefits of Brexit..........Madness abounds!

[RingoMcCartney]

1. The evidence we don’t have a free trade deal is that we haven’t started negotiations!! Are you now trying to pretend that not having a free trade deal is better than having a free trade deal? What evidence do you need, use google!!

6. It is evidence (the available body of facts indicating whether a proposition is true). Are you really trying to argue that not having influence is better than having influence?

9. It is evidence that it will have a negative impact on the U.K. why have you included the word “economy”?

1. You are now going round in circles.

Having no current trade deal. Is NOT "EVIDENCE" OF THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF BREXIT ON THE UK ECONOMY. The view it may have, is simply an opinion.

6, having influence or otherwise Is NOT "EVIDENCE" OF THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF BREXIT ON THE UK ECONOMY. The view it may have, is simply an opinion.

9 No its not. If it helps you I'll remove the word "economy". Not having access to the EAW is not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative on the uk.

FOR THE 9TH TIME. 

I HAVE NO EVIDENCE. 

YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE. 

YOU ONLY HAVE AN OPINION based on assumptions, projections, scenarios given varying criteria, predictions, assumptions and forecasts and short termism.

I ONLY HAVE AN OPINION.

[RingoMcCartney]

Where have I written that the team that conceded is definitely going to lose the game?

Clarets concede a penalty within minutes of the game starting.

Before the pen taker even steps up.-

"It's "evidence" of an inevitable crushing defeat!!!!!" Scream the confidence lacking Remoaners.

Burnley Ace wrote -

"uote="Burnley Ace"]That is evidence that the opposition will have a penalty. Regardless of whether they score or not, is it a positive or a negative to have a penalty? Most people would suggest it’s a positive to team that it’s given to.

If you were to look at all the available facts (historical statistics) it would provide evidence that a penalty is more likely to lead to a goal than a miss or does it just provide an opinion?[/quote]

Did it take years of practice to sound like a idiot or is it something that just comes natural?

[Taffy on the wing]

It's becoming clear, Ringo is a Troll or Bot.....i'm in the US and he was still on this thread in the wee hours.
It would explain his inflexibility & stamina.

[yorkyclaret]

Can't wait to get Pounds, Shillings and Tanners back.

[Burnley Ace]

You provided me with an example of an opinion. An opinion that fails to understand the terms "the uk paid more in than it got out!"

I said you may be remedial.

I'm starting to think I was being too generous.

Lol it’s not an opinion it’s evidence. The fact that you can’t understand it or then try to add caveats speaks for itself.

It is of no bearing whether the U.K. paid in more than it got out. It is a fact that the U.K. won’t get money from those funds and that’s a negative. You have now evidence that those funds will be matched by Government spending, or do you???

[DocFoster]

You're wasting your time Ringo.

The SKY is falling in and you could probably replace the user name of many (not all) of the remoaners on here with "Chicken Licken, Henny Penny, Cocky Locky, Ducky Lucky , Drakey Lakey, Goosey Loosey, Gander Lander, Turkey Lurkey and Foxy Loxy." You can decide which is which.

I liked this extract. But then I would wouldn't I.

One certainty of Brexit according to Remainers was that it would adversely impact on the UK economy just as the Europeans were enjoying growth. In the two years or more since the vote to leave, British employment and wages have improved, the economy has continued to expand, and the predicted flight of investors has failed to materialise.
Far from powering away to leave an ailing UK economy floundering in its wake, the eurozone is in trouble. Its cornerstone economies – Germany, France and Italy – are all heading into recession, according to the latest statistics. This would be the third contraction for the eurozone in a decade, hardly an advertisement for stability or a guarantor of prosperity.

[Burnley Ace]

1. You are now going round in circles.

Having no current trade deal. Is NOT "EVIDENCE" OF THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF BREXIT ON THE UK ECONOMY. The view it may have, is simply an opinion.

6, having influence or otherwise Is NOT "EVIDENCE" OF THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF BREXIT ON THE UK ECONOMY. The view it may have, is simply an opinion.

9 No its not. If it helps you I'll remove the word "economy". Not having access to the EAW is not "evidence" that brexit will have a negative on the uk.

FOR THE 9TH TIME. 

I HAVE NO EVIDENCE. 

YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE. 

YOU ONLY HAVE AN OPINION based on assumptions, projections, scenarios given varying criteria, predictions, assumptions and forecasts and short termism.

I ONLY HAVE AN OPINION.

Lol you can keep putting it in blocks but just keeps highlighting that you don’t understand what evidence is. Perhaps it might help if you give us your definition of “evidence” and “opinion” as it seems to be different to the one in the dictionary

[HieronymousBoschHobs]

Majority rule is an essentiual part of democracy and often used synonymously. So while you're technically correct the point made by Tall Paul stands.

Good post HBH

But it has to be majority rule, which is why the majority of the remainers on here accepted the result and waited for the deal.

The problem is that the promised deal is unobtainable, and no one appears willing to admit that so we count down to "No Deal".

Ringo et al will tell you that is what they voted for, but the majority of the country didn't, and that is why we are were we are.

We need principled and exceptional politicians to sort this out, and we've got absolute morons who couldn't organise a **** up in a brewery.

Compared to that, the constitutional implications should not be as important as the welfare and the economy of the country

Normally I would not be so pedantic - and I am not dismissing the idea that majority rule has a large role to play in a democracy - but the problem, as Lancaster alludes to, is that there can be times when the wisdom of the majority can impinge upon the rights of the minority. TaulPaul is correct, but it's just one part of a rather fuzzy picture. To be clear, I am not saying that Brexit is some great evil imposed on Remainers, instead, I'm saying it has conceptually and constitutionally opened up a can of worms which need not have been spread across this country when many people are already having a hard time.

So that it doesn't seem as though I'm on the fence: I voted remain, but at this point I want the country to get beyond the issue more than anything else. It won't happen; this will define our politics for a generation, perhaps two, and that's what really saddens me.

[Burnley Ace]

Did it take years of practice to sound like a idiot or is it something that just comes natural?

No, I’m just finding it really really difficult to come down to your level. I’m trying to break it down into little basic points to give you a opportunity of understanding but even that fails

Was my analogy about a penalty too complex for you? What bit didn’t you understand?

[Lancasterclaret]

Its nice to see the poster back who said the Irish backstop is all about fish.

That is the level we are comfortable on here I feel.