2.7 Million Brexiteers Have Changed to Remain

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:19 am

What about anecdotal evidence? A friend was in Germany last week and he said that the people he had dinner with expected that a German referendum would be a vote to leave.

You need a word with Wikipedia about your idea that there is nothing online that suggests there is an appetite for leaving in the other 26 (?) nations. Wikipedia reports the Five-Star movement as getting 32.7% of the vote in the Italian elections; they report the French National Front as getting 21.3% of the French presidential election; the Austrian Freedom Party 26% in the latest Austrian elections. They are all parties with many reasons not to vote for them, but they are also the only home for anti-EU voters. You can imagine them away if you wish, but just because you imagine they aren't there doesn't mean that they actually aren't there.

Anecdotal evidence? You've chatted to a German bloke and that means Germany is ready to abandon the EU?

Are you serious?

And the far right parties you mentioned - pretty sure Five star are in a coalition in government in Italy at the moment and they are not planning to leave the EU. NF in France won't be winning elections anytime soon (they never have yet), the austrian party isn't anti-EU.

I mean, they are far right fascist parties with a tough stance on immigration but they are not asking to leave the EU. Its going to be bad enough for an economy as developed as ours, it would be much worse for them!

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:23 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:It isn't.

Christ on a bike Ringo

This was you saying the money that Burnley has received through the EUs European Regional Development Fund was not our money coming back.

I've repeatedly asked you to disprove your ascertion that it wasn't.

Yet repeatedly you refused to and arrogantly mocked and sneered at me."Ringoeconomics". Anything complicated, anyone explaining anything that isn't "Ringonomics" just gets post after post of Ringovision."

You see lancs, regardless of your pompous opinion of me, I do know a reasonable amount about current affairs. And I now how the EU contributions and it's associated rebates and grants work. I was fully aware of it when I said "there's no such thing as EU money"

This is taken directly from the ONS website -

"This included £359 million that CAME BACK through the European Regional Development Fund and £2.4 billion through the Agricultural Guarantee Fund."

"But this only accounts for the money that the UK pays to the EU – some of this £13.9 billion is CREDITED BACK to the UK public sector, of which a proportion is then paid to the private sector.

ONS reports that £4.4 billion CAME BACK to the UK public sector and private sector in credits in 2016."

This was also taken from Full Fact, THE UK’S INDEPENDENT FACTCHECKING CHARITY-

"The UK gets MONEY BACK

The government then gets some of that MONEY BACK, mainly through payments to farmers and for poorer areas of the country such as Wales and Cornwall."

Now your clearly an intelligent guy. But are you going to accept you were wrong with a bit of dignity, or are you going to allow arrogance and ego get in the way of what are the officially accountable, inarguable indisputable facts. As quoted by the Office for National Statistics Statistics and Full Facts.?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:24 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:I'm a "bigger threat to democracy than people who blow themselves up, and my views are "cancerous to democracy. What in the name of!!!!?...

I'm worried that there is something toxic in the Turtle Bunker air conditioning system that's clearly having an effect on you.

Send for an engineer ASAP.

I didn't say your views were cancerous. If you weren't such a reactionary moron maybe you'd have re-read my post before displaying your lack of ability with facts. You're a liar, and you persistently use lies to form your arguments. And when your lies (or just mere falsehoods) are demonstrated to you you double-down and refuse to accept that you're wrong. There are millions like you who can't think critically, and hate those who do, and that's a problem for our democracy.

Yes, your hatred of facts is a cancer. Terrorism is a punch in the face and is easy to see, but attitudes like yours are a tumour that grows out of sight. "A cancer" is a more than apt description of the problem faced by the likes of you who will accept anything as truth, even if it's disprovable.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:25 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:I didn't say your views were cancerous. If you weren't such a reactionary moron maybe you'd have re-read my post before displaying your lack of ability with facts. You're a liar, and you persistently use lies to form your arguments. And when your lies (or just mere falsehoods) are demonstrated to you you double-down and refuse to accept that you're wrong. There are millions like you who can't think critically, and hate those who do, and that's a problem for our democracy.

Yes, your hatred of facts is a cancer. Terrorism is a punch in the face and is easy to see, but attitudes like yours are a tumour that grows out of sight. "A cancer" is a more than apt description of the problem faced by the likes of you who will accept anything as truth, even if it's disprovable.

See above post for a lesson on facts!

The gas man been yet!?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:28 am

(post 838)

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:29 am

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:31 am

It might well do, but that is guesswork until it is actually done.

A slight swing plus the change in demographics (even accounting for Crosspool deciding that if you are under 30 your vote does not count) would suggest that ie would similar to the original referendum, but the other way.

Would solve nothing, which is why I'd like us to sort out a deal.*

*even though we are miles away from that

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:38 am

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:39 am

This has all been said before:

There are people who voted to leave because they were assured there'd be a deal. If there is no such deal then how can carrying it out without a second referendum be democratic? Nothing else in this thread matters more than the will of the people being carried out, and no one knows what that will is because the original referendum wasn't clear.

The only reason to oppose a second vote after you supported the first one is if you're worried that the vote might not go your way. If the people want to leave the EU with "No Deal" then we should be allowed to make that clear. And if we don't then we should be allowed to make that clear too.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:39 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Not going to work that Paul

As has already been said, you might as well have a STV system in which you rank your choices. And you can't have one remain option and two leave options I don't think.

Probably the only way to do it would be a straight leave/remain, and then a second vote if leave win on "No deal" or "some sort of deal".

Either way I'd prefer to avoid another vote entirely, but unless someone has a plan that can get universal support its the only way out of this mess.

Hi Lancs, so does two Remain options work - alongside two leave options? As above, 3 votes to be cast against 4 selections - spoilt ballots rejected, as above.

What would the two remain options be? (1) Remain on exactly the same deal as we had before UK called Article 50? (2) Remain and the UK exercises it's option to block everything the EU wants to do going forward (i.e. we've often heard "but we can block anything we don't like), or (3) Remain and go "full tilt" for a "united states of Europe?"

I'm sure if we put our minds to it we can identify many other alternative Remain outcomes.....

Haven't we already done the leave/remain vote - and the discussion is now about what type of leave, etc, etc, etc.... (you get the point).

PS: Have you found the time to read about Marc Roche yet?

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:40 am

Devils_Advocate wrote:Far simpler way out of this mess is to just scrap the disaster that is Brexit and go back to as we were. Yep a few idiots might have to suck it up and might moan and cry a little but you cant sacrifice the good of this country for a load of ill informed snowflakes.

Time our political leaders got a backbone showed some courage and restored what was great about our country and its partnership with the other EU countrys

Not quite sure that represents utilising a spinal column, I'm glad you've mentioned "what was" if thats not subconsciously acknowledging past tense I'm not sure what is, in truth the UK in general has been on the rocks whilst remaining a member of the EU for a substantial period of time, papering over the cracks has concealed it quite well.

levraiclaret · Post by **levraiclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:43 am

Paul Waine wrote:OK 1: My proposal to make everyone comfortable to re-run the referendum....

We have a vote with 3 choices: 1) remain; 2) Brexit with no deal; 3) Brexit with any deal that the EU will allow the UK to have.

Every member of the electorate (we stick to our usual GE electorate) has 2 votes and MUST use those two votes to make two different selections.

So, those that favour LEAVE can select options (2) and (3) - or place one of their votes against option (1) if they wish.

Similarly, those who favour REMAIN can place one of their votes against option (1) - and must also place their second vote against either option (2) or option (3).

Any ballot paper that only shows 1 vote is treated as a spoilt ballot paper. Similarly, an ballot paper that allocates two votes to the same option is a spoilt ballot. (For clarity, all spoilt ballot papers are rejected and excluded from the count).

The votes cast for the three options are summed and the option with the highest number of votes is the winner. No transferable votes, just pick your highest two preferences

If the original 52:48 has stayed the same, then this new ballot will allow everyone to determine which has the majority between leaving with no deal and leaving with whatever deal the EU will agree to.

This manner avoids any suggestion that re-running the referendum is designed to split the LEAVE vote and give REMAIN the advantage.

Has anyone already put forward this proposal?

Of course, if we have 4 choices on the ballot paper then we would have to place 3 votes and so on.

Paul, one question

Are the 2 votes equal or do voters indicate their preferences?

If it be your will · Post by **If it be your will** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:46 am

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:57 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:
I mean, Brexit backing (massively different from Brexit supporting btw as he's using money to influence the vote) hedge fund manager who made a fortune on Brexit day is quite a big hint in my book (though he's lost money on currency speculation overall doesn't change the fact that he made a tidy sum on Brexit day surely?)

This is the one that got me the most to be honest.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features ... -the-crash" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And it sounds like you are like me, enough to make Burnley games and stuff but thats it. Looks like we will both be hit after Brexit.

Lancs, what you need to understand about "hedge fund makes a lot of money" headlines is that they are only reporting the ones that made lots of money. There's nearly always other hedge funds on the other side that have also lost lots of money on the same situation. However, "[insert your own preferred event] resulted in some hedge funds making money and some losing money" isn't an exciting headline and doesn't sell many newspapers (or however you take your media these days).

Business that exist to "make a lot of money" generally don't see publicity on the occasions when they "don't make a lot of money...." because it doesn't help them add to the funds provided by their clients.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:58 am

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

Its either remain or it isn't!

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:01 am

levraiclaret wrote:Paul, one question

Are the 2 votes equal or do voters indicate their preferences?

Equal votes, just two Xs placed against two of the options.

We might foot note the ballot with a statement along the lines of "by voting you acknowledge that you have done all the research you need to do, that when the counts are declared you will not claim that anyone provided inaccurate information or lied to you.... etc.

However, all the electorates are "grown ups" so we shouldn't need that qualification, should we?

EDIT: Oops, typed "should" when I meant "shouldn't"

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:02 am

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!

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:03 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Anecdotal evidence? You've chatted to a German bloke and that means Germany is ready to abandon the EU?

Are you serious?

And the far right parties you mentioned - pretty sure Five star are in a coalition in government in Italy at the moment and they are not planning to leave the EU. NF in France won't be winning elections anytime soon (they never have yet), the austrian party isn't anti-EU.

I mean, they are far right fascist parties with a tough stance on immigration but they are not asking to leave the EU. Its going to be bad enough for an economy as developed as ours, it would be much worse for them!

I think you've misunderstood your own statement. You said there is no appetite for leaving the EU in the other 26(?) nations and that's why they it's natural that there is no call for a referendum in those nations. I reckon that if 41% of French voters (thanks, IIBYW - I'd forgotten the communists) voted for anti-EU parties, and incidentally Macron himself said that he thought an EU referendum would vote to leave, then it can't be true that there is no appetite for leaving.

UKIP didn't even get 10% in the UK general election, but that doesn't mean there was no appetite for leaving in the UK?

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:06 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:How does that stop smuggling through the 600 plus roads though?

And it would be absolutely rife, not a "risk of abuse"

Rest of your post is sensible, but again the Canada ++ isn't ideal (though I concede its better than a No deal)

The problem is that the Canada ++ was not what was sold to the British Public, and you know that as well as I do.

Essentially we are going around in circles here!

Does anyone know if Canada ++ (with no hard border in Ireland) is acceptable to the UK Govt and the EU?

It must be stressed that Canada+++ is NOT a hard Brexit. A hard Brexit was originally WTO terms.

Canada is the closest to what the public were promised - taking back control but no cliff edge. Chequers and EEA were not what were promised, it is wrong to imply otherwise.

We would lose out on some of the supply chain stuff, but would gain in other flexibility around the world. But the supply chain stuff has been on a downward spiral for years anyway, I’d like to keep it, but I wouldn’t stake the future of the U.K. on Honda etc.

P.s. I think the smuggling being rife bit is being overplayed. That could be policed quite effectively, we are a major world nation, not the sweat shop of the world. Standards won’t be hugely different even if we do diverge.

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:06 am

I hope the people on here calling for a 2nd vote weren't the ones who mocked the SNP for wanting another vote on independence.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:07 am

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?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:11 am

The public were promised "the easiest deal in history" Crosspool with "no downsides"

That is not Canada ++

I don't get that you and others don't get this. Its (sadly) completely unarguable that what was promised before the referendum is not what is going to happen.

The Brexiteers have dug their own hole here, and its not anyone's fault but their own. And the country is suffering as a result.

android · Post by **android** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:12 am

LC your latest link was more stuff about betting on the night of the referendum. So some hedge funds conducted private polling and some may even have attempted to spread disinformation but on a close to 50-50 result they were gambling Some would have made money that night and more would have lost as the consensus was for a remain win.

The impression you and others created was that somehow AFTER Brexit happens the elites are going to make a ton of money. I have yet to see any evidence. There was a lot of fear of Brexit amongst wealthy people (and many voted Remain even though they would have liked to leave the EU) as they expected a Brexit vote to hit their house prices (has happened) and share prices (hasn't happened except in the immediate shock of the result - but many expected to be hit and voted accordingly). The story does not fit.

Logging out for rest of day but could continue later if necessary.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:12 am

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?

Are you going to reply to my post Lancs or is arrogance going to get better of you?

You were only to keen to respond with some fine quality sneering yesterday, were you not?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:15 am

Enjoy your day Android!

I'll have a look if I get a chance but again I'm fairly sure aggi answered that a couple of pages back, and I've explained on three posts why I think its significant that a Brexit backer bet for Brexit.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:19 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Enjoy your day Android!

I'll have a look if I get a chance but again I'm fairly sure aggi answered that a couple of pages back, and I've explained on three posts why I think its significant that a Brexit backer bet for Brexit.

The fact that you're pretending that you haven't read my post and choosing to, for the first time ever, practice abstinence, where it comes to making a reasonable response to my post, speaks volumes!

Lancasterclaret wrote:It isn't.

Christ on a bike Ringo

This was you saying the money that Burnley has received through the EUs European Regional Development Fund was not our money coming back.

I've repeatedly asked you to disprove your ascertion that it wasn't.

Yet repeatedly you refused to and arrogantly mocked and sneered at me."Ringoeconomics". Anything complicated, anyone explaining anything that isn't "Ringonomics" just gets post after post of Ringovision."

You see lancs, regardless of your pompous opinion of me, I do know a reasonable amount about current affairs. And I now how the EU contributions and it's associated rebates and grants work. I was fully aware of it when I said "there's no such thing as EU money"

This is taken directly from the ONS website -

"This included £359 million that CAME BACK through the European Regional Development Fund and £2.4 billion through the Agricultural Guarantee Fund."

"But this only accounts for the money that the UK pays to the EU – some of this £13.9 billion is CREDITED BACK to the UK public sector, of which a proportion is then paid to the private sector.

ONS reports that £4.4 billion CAME BACK to the UK public sector and private sector in credits in 2016."

This was also taken from Full Fact, THE UK’S INDEPENDENT FACTCHECKING CHARITY-

"The UK gets MONEY BACK

The government then gets some of that MONEY BACK, mainly through payments to farmers and for poorer areas of the country such as Wales and Cornwall."

Now your clearly an intelligent guy. But are you going to accept you were wrong with a bit of dignity, or are you going to allow arrogance and ego get in the way of what are the officially accountable, inarguable indisputable facts. As quoted by the Office for National Statistics Statistics and Full Facts.?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:22 am

But his refusal to see anything outside his comfort zone is why everyone who disagrees with him on here either ignores him (me now sadly as i've had enough), take the **** or answers him less than politely.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:28 am

[quote="Lancasterclaret"][/quote]

So this is the fisrt glimmer that you are able to resist that reflex to respond to your superiority complex.

Are you going to respond to my post and accept with grace, that when I said that money that the UK receives from the EU for the purposes that nil-desperandum was referring to. Was NOT our own money coming back.?

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:49 am

Devils_Advocate wrote:Far simpler way out of this mess is to just scrap the disaster that is Brexit and go back to as we were. Yep a few idiots might have to suck it up and might moan and cry a little but you cant sacrifice the good of this country for a load of ill informed snowflakes.

Time our political leaders got a backbone showed some courage and restored what was great about our country and its partnership with the other EU countrys

As someone who voted to leave in 2016,i can now see that with no viable exit plan,scrapping Brexit is becoming more plausible by the day.

How the government/parliament goes about this i have no idea,but we are heading for a no deal scenario at a rate of knots,and no one wants that.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:49 am

When Cameron went off to Europe, if the EU had only stopped and thought , " there is clearly discontent in many countries across the EU. Perhaps we should listen to Mr Cameron's modest requests which reflect many many of the concerns of felt by milllions of our citizens". We would not have reached this position.

But no, the refusal and sheer belligerence to even consider that the structure, accountability and overall operation of the EU may need revising, by the EU elite. Instead, sending him home with his tail between his legs, has now come back to bite them on the backside......

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:57 am

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?

Why is that relevant? Are you still arguing that there is no appetite for leaving the EU?

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:59 am

dsr wrote:Why is that relevant? Are you still arguing that there is no appetite for leaving the EU?

It appears that he's still arguing that funds that are given to poorer areas of the UK from the EU is NOT our own money coming back to us!

Despite being presented with both independent and highly respected, sourced facts.

He's a strange one. He's by no means stupid. But he's very very stubborn. Apparently .......

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 12:09 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:in truth the UK in general has been on the rocks whilst remaining a member of the EU for a substantial period of time, papering over the cracks has concealed it quite well.

I think you are misunderstanding the cause and effect element of this issue. Pretty much every alcoholic and drug addict I have come across likes and eats chips but I wouldn't suggest that stopping people eating chips is the answer to all our alcohol and drug related problems

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 12:39 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:I think you are misunderstanding the cause and effect element of this issue. Pretty much every alcoholic and drug addict I have come across likes and eats chips but I wouldn't suggest that stopping people eating chips is the answer to all our alcohol and drug related problems

Not sure on that example or how alcohol or chips fit into this

A extremely simple question was asked on 23 June 2016, a extremely simple answer was given

maybe somewhere in between I've gone wrong with what has actually happened or is in the process of happening, correct me please I insist if that is incorrect.

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:02 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:Not sure on that example or how alcohol or chips fit into this A extremely simple question was asked on 23 June 2016, a extremely simple answer was given maybe somewhere in between I've gone wrong with what has actually happened or is in the process of happening, correct me please I insist if that is incorrect.

Your comment I quoted was not about the referendum but about how the UK has been suffering for a long time as an EU member. I questioned you interpretation of the cause and effect around this and gave a pretty simple analogy to demonstrate my point. If you cant even remember or understand what your original point was about then no wonder you cant grasp my simple analogy but please don't worry about it and don't waste your time trying to get your head around it

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:02 pm

Tusk- "sorry, no cherry"

Britain - " sorry, no £39 billion. Bye".........

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:11 pm

its as relevant as you claiming there is an appetite for leaving the EU within the other countries in the EU to be fair.

Amount of EU countries with impending referendums on leaving = 0

Amount of EU countries with discussion about referendums on leaving = 0

Thats kinda impossible to argue with.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:18 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:its as relevant as you claiming there is an appetite for leaving the EU within the other countries in the EU to be fair.

Amount of EU countries with impending referendums on leaving = 0

Amount of EU countries with discussion about referendums on leaving = 0

Thats kinda impossible to argue with.

I see. We're at cross purposes again - you are talking only about politicians talking of leaving and completely disregarding the views of the puiblic - exactly as Muscat was. Though really, when the whole thread started with a post about a second referendum and my post was about referendums, answering on the basis that public votes are irrelevant seems to somehow miss the point.

Anyway, I'll make the same point again, only clearer. It seems strange that the 27 EU leaders are almost unanimous that they want the UK to have a second referendum because they are very interested to know the views of the public about whether the UK should stay in the EU; while the 27 EU leaders are entirely unanimous that they do not want to know the views of their own publics about whether their country should stay in the EU. Why does the Maltese PM interested in a UK referendum but not a Maltese referendum? What is it about the British public that makes our views so much more worthy than anyone else's?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:22 pm

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

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:26 pm

Oh what this, live statement from No 10 at 1345.

Could she be jacking it all in?

Now known as "doing a Cameron"?

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:29 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:Your comment I quoted was not about the referendum but about how the UK has been suffering for a long time as an EU member. I questioned you interpretation of the cause and effect around this and gave a pretty simple analogy to demonstrate my point. If you cant even remember or understand what your original point was about then no wonder you cant grasp my simple analogy but please don't worry about it and don't waste your time trying to get your head around it

I remember everything

what I didn't bank upon nor expect is a post going on about chips & alcohol, I'm glad you take such a serious issue seriously.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:39 pm

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

No idea. You tell me.

Do you believe that there is any public appetite to leave the EU among the peoples of Europe?

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:39 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Oh what this, live statement from No 10 at 1345.

Could she be jacking it all in?

Now known as "doing a Cameron"?

I said " there is no such thing as EU money. It's just our money coming back to us"

You said, "Christ on a bike Ringo! It's not!"

I then repeatedly asked you to disprove your ascertion.

You refused to on numerous occasions. Choosing to belittle me with "Ringoeconomics" and "Ringovision", claiming it wasn't as simple as what I was saying.

I've provided you with facts , measurable, accounted for and unequivocally accurate facts. Provide by the respected ONS and Full Fact bodies.

ONS-

"This included £359 million that CAME BACK through the European Regional Development Fund and £2.4 billion through the Agricultural Guarantee Fund."

"Some have argued that there are other payments that should be taken into account. Money from the EU also COMES BACK directly to the UK private sector (for example, to fund research in UK universities). ONS data does not separately identify direct flows from the EU to the UK private sector."

FULL FACT-

"The UK gets MONEY BACK.

The government then gets some of that MONEY BACK, mainly through payments to farmers and for poorer areas of the country such as Wales and Cornwall."

You really are looking silly now. By simply not admitting I was right and you were wrong. I know it's me, and you have zero respect for my opinion, and that we are horizontally opposed, when it comes to politics. But if you display a degree of self respect and admit you called it wrong the sky will not fall in.

Be the bigger man Lancs.

When it comes to money coming back to poorer regions through the European Regional Development Fund, it's our money coming back. Swallow your pride and just admit you are wrong.

We'll still both be clarets after pal

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:40 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:I remember everything what I didn't bank upon nor expect is a post going on about chips & alcohol, I'm glad you take such a serious issue seriously.

One of oasis's classic tunes

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:50 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:I remember everything what I didn't bank upon nor expect is a post going on about chips & alcohol, I'm glad you take such a serious issue seriously.

If you think the key part of the post was about the chips and the alcohol then you still haven't really got your head around it. Anyhow no bother as the key thing is still that we should just pull the plug on Brexit and learn the lesson that silly referendums are not a good idea and can easily lead to disaster as the last two years have shown us.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:51 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Oh what this, live statement from No 10 at 1345.

Could she be jacking it all in?

Now known as "doing a Cameron"?

She will double down on Chequers, i repeat, nothing has changed.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:52 pm

Emmanuel Macron's dissaproval ratings are currently running at 71%.

What ever you do, do not mention the security guards!!!

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:55 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Oh what this, live statement from No 10 at 1345.

Could she be jacking it all in?

Now known as "doing a Cameron"?

She’s just going to dance to The Smiths Please please let me get what I want.

Or she’ll just scream “Red, White and Blue Brexit”

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:57 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Oh what this, live statement from No 10 at 1345.

Could she be jacking it all in?

Now known as "doing a Cameron"?

May is challenging Tusk to a fight on the Joshua under card.
Saying She'll take his ******* Cherry

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:59 pm

Just announced on SKY NEWS:
"Theresa May's official statement from Downing St has been delayed due to a lack of power!"
You can say that again!.