Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Imploding Turtle]

Not at all. I know most of the remainers on here wouldn't do anything so pro-active about something they are so passionate about

How many pro-brexit marches did you attend to get brexit? And if none do you think it would be fair to dismiss your argument based on the fact that you didn't physically spend money to travel to London to march with 12 others and a dog to get what you are so passionate about?

Of course it wouldn't be. Because people who do dismiss other people's arguments based on such things are ******* morons. And yes, i'm talking about people who use "virtue-signaller" unironically.

[Damo]

How many pro-brexit marches did you attend to get brexit?

Just the one to cast my vote

[Imploding Turtle]

Just the one to cast my vote

Interesting. So it's OK for you not to attend marches and have your arguments treated accordingly based on their merits, but not those who disagree with you.

Are you even ashamed of this blatant double-standard you hold? This isn't a rhetorical question.

[Damo]

Interesting. So it's OK for you not to attend marches and have your arguments treated accordingly based on their merits, but not those who disagree with you.

Are you even ashamed of this blatant double-standard you hold? This isn't a rhetorical question.

Why would I need to demonstrate something that I voted for?
It's all going as exactly to plan as far as I can see

[Imploding Turtle]

Why would I need to demonstrate something that I voted for?
It's all going as exactly to plan as far as I can see

I was referring to the marches prior to the referendum calling for a referendum.

Tell me, is there ANY opinion you've shared on here with regards to politics or this country that you haven't attended a march or demonstration for? Because i'm assuming you attend them very regularly if you think that people sharing opinions about things for which they don't march as "virtue-signallers".

[martin_p]

Not at all. I know most of the remainers on here wouldn't do anything so pro-active about something they are so passionate about

Pots and kettles spring to mind for some reason.

[martin_p]

Why would I need to demonstrate something that I voted for?
It's all going as exactly to plan as far as I can see

Must’ve been a pretty strange plan!

[Damo]

I was referring to the marches prior to the referendum calling for a referendum.

Tell me, is there ANY opinion you've shared on here with regards to politics or this country that you haven't attended a march or demonstration for? Because i'm assuming you attend them very regularly if you think that people sharing opinions about things for which they don't march as "virtue-signallers".

I vote in favour of things that I want to happen. If it doesn't go my way then I just accept it

[Damo]

Pots and kettles spring to mind for some reason.

Are you going to say something constructive Martin. You already admitted you couldn't be @rsed to March. I would of left it there if I was you

[martin_p]

Are you going to say something constructive Martin. You already admitted you couldn't be @rsed to March. I would of left it there if I was you

Classic keyboard warrior! I don’t ‘trigger’ damo, you’re wasting your time.

[Lancasterclaret]

I can only assume that the Brexit bunch are at chequers to be explained to again that the only Brexit available is Mays deal.

Surely after this weekend that might actually get through?

[SmudgetheClaret]

Oh oh Dutch anti EU party smash it in elections..

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/11 ... list-Rutte" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Imploding Turtle]

I vote in favour of things that I want to happen. If it doesn't go my way then I just accept it

lol. You didn't though, did you? Repeatedly the public voted against UKIP and in favour of parties that didn't demand a referendum. And yet you no doubt still wanted one. And then you got one. So clearly you didn't accept that the public repeatedly voted against UKIP. And yet you criticise others for doing the exact same. Arguing their case to convince the country to change its mind.

[Damo]

Classic keyboard warrior! I don’t ‘trigger’ damo, you’re wasting your time.

You dont sound "triggered" in the slightest Martin. Honest

[martin_p]

You dont sound "triggered" in the slightest Martin. Honest

You’re right I don’t.

So anyway, if there’s a second referendum you’ll be marching right?

[Imploding Turtle]

Oh oh Dutch anti EU party smash it in elections..

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/11 ... list-Rutte" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

More far-right nationalists gaining power. All the more reason to learn about the alt-right to protect yourself from their fascism.

No you, obviously, smudge. Because you're a big fan. But other people.

[Damo]

lol. You didn't though, did you? Repeatedly the public voted against UKIP and in favour of parties that didn't demand a referendum. And yet you no doubt still wanted one. And then you got one. So clearly you didn't accept that the public repeatedly voted against UKIP. And yet you criticise others for doing the exact same. Arguing their case to convince the country to change its mind.

Not sure where you are going with this Charlie (other than proving my point) everything that has happened politically that has brought us to this point, I have voted for. And it's working.
I didnt need to March in London, or show fellow marchers some solidarity by getting angry on here about it. It all just worked out via the medium of voting a few times

[Damo]

You’re right I don’t.

So anyway, if there’s a second referendum you’ll be marching right?

Stop talking about unicorns Martin. Wishing hard enough for a second referendum isn't going to make it materialise

[martin_p]

More far-right nationalists gaining power. All the more reason to learn about the alt-right to protect yourself from their fascism.

No you, obviously, smudge. Because you're a big fan. But other people.

I wouldn’t go as far as ‘gaining power’. There’s no majority and a coalition will form to govern without them.

[Imploding Turtle]

Not sure where you are going with this Charlie (other than proving my point) everything that has happened politically that has brought us to this point, I have voted for. And it's working.
I didnt need to March in London, or show fellow marchers some solidarity by getting angry on here about it. It all just worked out via the medium of voting a few times

And if we vote again and it's clear that we've changed our mind are you then going to apologise to all those you accused of virtue-signalling for only placing a ballot? Because that's all you did, and yet it's OK when it's all you do.

I'm demonstrating your blatant hypocrisy, Damo. As ******* usual. That's where i'm going.

Are you actually aware of your hypocrisy? Is it something you even care about? Because when I discover a double standard in my opinions i do my best to resolve it. Don't you?

[martin_p]

Stop talking about unicorns Martin. Wishing hard enough for a second referendum isn't going to make it materialise

You haven’t read my post have you, I thought it was quite clear.

[Imploding Turtle]

I wouldn’t go as far as ‘gaining power’. There’s no majority and a coalition will form to govern without them.

They have more power than they had before. I believe 'gaining' is an adequate description of the direction in which their power is increasing or decreasing.

[Damo]

And if we vote again and it's clear that we've changed our mind are you then going to apologise to all those you accused of virtue-signalling for only placing a ballot? Because that's all you did, and yet it's OK when it's all you do.

I'm demonstrating your blatant hypocrisy, Damo. As ******* usual. That's where i'm going.

Are you actually aware of your hypocrisy? Is it something you even care about? Because when I discover a double standard in my opinions i do my best to resolve it. Don't you?

You haven't changed your mind. Neither has anyone else. There wont be a 2nd vote. Though as previously stated, you are welcome to one when the result of this one has been enacted

[Imploding Turtle]

You haven't changed your mind. Neither has anyone else. There wont be a 2nd vote. Though as previously stated, you are welcome to one when the result of this one has been enacted

Polls consistently show that you are wrong.

And this is where you claim that all the polls are wrong. every one of them. Except the ones used to make millions for Farage's mates.

[Damo]

You haven’t read my post have you, I thought it was quite clear.

I read your post Martin. You were talking about an imaginary situation. Hence the unicorn reference

[dsr]

How referendums should be conducted - a good thread

https://twitter.com/redhistorian/status ... 4876178432" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are two things that I believe Saunders to be saying, and I think there are flaws in both.

The easy one is that he is saying now that Parliament should secide what to do about Brexit and put that decision to a second referendum, yes or no. Two problems - one, as we have seen, Parliament can't decide; two, there are three basic options (Remain, Leave, May's deal) and Parliament can only approve one of them. Which leads to the question, yes or no, what?

The other flaw is that he suggests that as a rule, referendums should only happen at the end of a parliamentary process. But for Brexit, this couldn't happen because the EU flatly would not negotiate a hypothetical withdrawal. Why should they? It would be a lot of time and effort (as we know) with a very good chance of no end result. A dead waste of time, in fact. Suppose Scotland were to have a second referendum (which I know you have already flatly opposed, but let's suppose). How much parliamentary and civil service time would be spent on working out the deal, before we even know if there is any point? It's not practical.

[Damo]

Polls consistently show that you are wrong.

And this is where you claim that all the polls are wrong. every one of them. Except the ones used to make millions for Farage's mates.

Which poll Charlie? How about you post one and we can talk about its credibility based on previous results

[Jakubclaret]

I vote in favour of things that I want to happen. If it doesn't go my way then I just accept it

Most normal people do.

[Imploding Turtle]

Which poll Charlie? How about you post one and we can talk about its credibility based on previous results

How about i post a fuckton of them? You want me to post only one poll because you and I both know that any single poll can be questioned quite credibly. But what can't be questioned is this clear trend away from voting to leave being the correct decision (in green) to being the wrong decision (in red)

[TonbridgeClaret]

And here’s the latest poll.

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/i ... o-do-next/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[martin_p]

I read your post Martin. You were talking about an imaginary situation. Hence the unicorn reference

Yep, that’s why I used the word ‘if’. It’s called a hypothetical question. Why won’t you answer it?

[Lancasterclaret]

A "No Deal" is seriously bad news.

Shocking as it seems to some, I'm not convinced it isn't by a combination of disaster capitalists and blokes from Burnley who just like the phrase "WTO"

The politicians have to agree a deal this week that is acceptable to enough to get through parliament and will meet with approval of the EU.

If they can't, then its either "No Deal" or Revoke Article 50. That is a decision that I hope we don't have to make.

[Damo]

How about i post a fuckton of them? You want me to post only one poll because you and I both know that any single poll can be questioned quite credibly. But what can't be questioned is this clear trend away from voting to leave being the correct decision (in green) to being the wrong decision (in red)

That's pretty much just yougov Charlie you idiot

[summitclaret]

Anyone else noticed that the BBC and even SKY News bang on about Norway plus in articles but hardly ever mention a free trade agreement in any detail. Similarly they bang on about no deal and WTO. Why is it that the option clearly closest to what leave voters wanted is so little discussed?

Could it be because they want to show leave as exteme which is not true generally

[Damo]

Yep, that’s why I used the word ‘if’. It’s called a hypothetical question. Why won’t you answer it?

Because I'm not interested in discussing things that are not going to happen

[Lancasterclaret]

Because it won't get past the EU as it involves not signing the Withdrawal agreement and therefore is an automatic "No Deal"

[summitclaret]

No. It is up for grabs in the next phase and we know that is the reason why the ERG won't agree a deal that clearly gives all the cards again to the EU.

[Lancasterclaret]

Yes, but then sign this agreement and then go for an FTA.

But the withdrawal agreement has to be signed. This week ideally.

[martin_p]

They have more power than they had before. I believe 'gaining' is an adequate description of the direction in which their power is increasing or decreasing.

Well strictly speaking if they were outside the previous coalition government and will be outside any new coalition government they have exactly the same amount of power, I.e. none.

But I’m not getting into an argument about it, I was only trying to demonstrate that despite the fact they’re the joint biggest party that they won’t be in charge in Holland.

[summitclaret]

Yes, but then sign this agreement and then go for an FTA.

But the withdrawal agreement has to be signed. This week ideally.

Agree but may has to go before the trade discussions and Robbins etc.

Trouble still is will thd DUP still support the government with the backstop being unchanged?

[martin_p]

Looks like MV3 may have been going ahead tomorrow, but now the DUP are saying their view hasn’t changed, so who knows!

[tiger76]

Looks like MV3 may have been going ahead tomorrow, but now the DUP are saying their view hasn’t changed, so who knows!

Wording will be interesting,how are they going to persuade the speaker to allow a vote on essentially the same legislation.

Indicative votes might clear the fog,but even that's not certain,unless MP'S can coalesce around a definite plan to present to the EU 27,we're still playing political games,while the country seeks certainty above everything else.

[nil_desperandum]

Wording will be interesting,how are they going to persuade the speaker to allow a vote on essentially the same legislation.
.

Irrelevant because Bercow said that if they want to vote on it a 3rd time, they have the power to "hold a vote" on a motion that proposes it.
Obviously if this motion passes then so will May's deal, because only those who want to vote for May's deal will vote for the proposal to hold the vote!
(Clear as day!)

[martin_p]

Looks like MV3 is off as May can’t get the support she needs to pass it through the HoC.

[summitclaret]

A soft pointless Brexit will be the only thing to have any chance of getting a majority from the House of Traitors. Why would any ever believe any tory or labour manifesto ever again.

[nil_desperandum]

A soft pointless Brexit will be the only thing to have any chance of getting a majority from the House of Traitors. Why would any ever believe any tory or labour manifesto ever again.

Without checking the actual wording, I don't think the Labour manifesto, actually promised a "hard" or "no deal" brexit.
(No doubt you'll find the evidence to prove me wrong, in which case I'll hold my hand up).
Here is the opening statement in the relevant section of the manifesto:
"Labour accepts the referendum result and a Labour government will put the national interest first.
We will prioritise jobs and living standards, build a close new relationship with the EU, protect workers’ rights and environmental standards, provide certainty to EU nationals and give a meaningful role to Parliament throughout negotiations.
We will end Theresa May’s reckless approach to Brexit, and seek to unite the country around a Brexit deal that works for every community in Britain.
We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first.

[BleedingClaret]

Don't you think that's a bit naive?
General elections aren't fought on single issues.
Supposing your "hard brexit" candidate also favoured (e.g.) privatising the NHS, and a whole series of other policies that you were totally opposed to, whilst the "soft brexit" candidate's other policies matched quite closely with yours, and whilst simultaneously you agreed with virtually everything that the "remain" candidate stood for, (except remaining)?
Not so straightforward is it?

Fair point, and probably part of the reasons why a Referendum is called in the first place, in exceptional circumstances for major issues, to avoid putting Parliament and it's MP's head to head, and on a collision course, with the country and it's people on massive emotive issues.
If they don't honour it then that needs resolving before they get on with the rest of day to day issues.
I believe that the NHS is doomed unless we control Brexit related issues, so Brexit must be honoured first IMO.

[BleedingClaret]

Oh, absolutely "you go girl" is intended to be sarcastic. It's a fun saying.

Any btw, you're absolutely right that it's ridiculous that we accept deceit in politics, but for the last two or three years i've been told that it doesn't matter and that a referendum result should be allowed to stand despite the deceit.

The headline deceit is 350million a week for the NHS Big Red Bus....
39 Billion divided by 350 million is 111.428571429 - 111 Weeks of 350 million so that's over 2 years for a start...
So it's logical if we stop paying EU dividends, as a Net Contributor, that we can free up funds for the NHS and the likes

[Lowbankclaret]

Anyone else noticed that the BBC and even SKY News bang on about Norway plus in articles but hardly ever mention a free trade agreement in any detail. Similarly they bang on about no deal and WTO. Why is it that the option clearly closest to what leave voters wanted is so little discussed?

Could it be because they want to show leave as exteme which is not true generally

I am not sure why people go on about the Norway deal. I spent 6 months working with a great bloke from Norway and we exchanged notes and had many debates.
We did disagree on what the UK should do, he said the UK should stay in, I disagreed then and still do.

However the Norway deal is a bad deal indeed. They have to accept all EU laws, free movement etc. We worked out that they pay the same amount per person to be in . However they get no money back in grants etc.
So we would be better staying in than a Norway deal.

[Lowbankclaret]

I also expect the EU will demand a massive amount of money per year for a free trade deal.

What I hope we don’t do is end up still being the second biggest contributor getting little in return. We will have to pay for a free trade deal I just hope we have enough left to replace EU subsidies to Farmers etc.