[Politics] Brexit

[Blackadder]

The two Sunderland leave thickos on News At Ten.
"We would still vote leave, it's all the fault of the people trying to stop Brexit".
Every time I see leavers being interviewed on the street, they blame everybody else except themselves, they still believe that it will all go well, that everything will be fine for this country.
Unbelievably ignorant and stubborn and all goes to prove that they considered nothing except immigration and hating the EU.
Just like 2 'bottom of the pond' leave voters who constantly show their total ignorance on this thread.
Still, on our way.

Have a look at the views of Sunderland Fans on their RTG forum.

There are some interesting points on both sides plus hilarious responses to Larry who defeated Johnny Foreigner in 1940.

https://www.readytogo.net/smb/threads/nissan-to-cancel-x-trail.1460852/

 

[ManOfSussex]

I first noticed the "Newspaper" a few months ago when I popped into the Baker Street Spoons for a quick pint. The prices were a lot more there than prices you quoted for Hastings.

Anyway, that's By the By. What I don't understand is the Business Risk Martin are taking. There are people who love spoons and people who hate the place. Always has been,

If one could assume that he already has his customer base. Why risk losing customers by alienating them?

I don't go into a pub to receive a political lecture, whichever flavour of politics is pushed.

It's a very strange business decision to tie your colours to a political mast like that as Tim Martin has done on such a divisive and toxic issue too.

 

[Baldseagull]

Yes she brokered a deal with the EU. The UK parliament then voted it down. That's not her reneging on the deal.

After her deal was rejected by parliament, it's understandable she then wants to come up with a new one.

I'm not arguing that she or the rest of the government has covered themselves in glory, it's a shit show, but it's not correct to say she made a deal with the EU that she's then turned her back on. It got rejected.

If she not only accepts that it can be renegotiated, but supports an amendment requiring her to, then she has reneged on her word to parliament that it is as good as it gets and can't be renegotiated.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Fair enough. What form of Brexit were you voting for and would you say it's the same as every other Brexit voter was voting for? I only ask because every one of my Leave-voting friends appears to have voted for something different and am therefore unable to 'KNOW WHAT THEY WERE VOTING FOR'.

The Tories can't even agree, let alone the voters.

[tweet]1092368658742038528[/tweet]

 

[Dorset Seagull]

You couldn’t have possibly known what form leaving would take therefore you cannot possiby have known what you were voting for. Forget Leave vs Remain, forget point scoring . It’s logic. In voting leave you started a process not just a result.

By the same token you can’t possibly know what the EU will look like in the future yet to decided to remain in it

 

[Springal]

By the same token you can’t possibly know what the EU will look like in the future yet to decided to remain in it

But remaining is the status quo, so the argument for change should always be stronger than sticking with it

 

[Dorset Seagull]

But remaining is the status quo, so the argument for change should always be stronger than sticking with it

And many leavers asked themselves that question and decided that the argument for change was stronger

 

[Springal]

And many leavers asked themselves that question and decided that the argument for change was stronger

Yes because sheep and simpletons believed a load of LIES. There was no real research into the impact carried out at that time.

You can't tell me my mate Ash on Facebook voted leave because he understood the impact now, he voted solely based on immigration and that he thought anyone not with a British passport or visa will be deported.

 

[Baldseagull]

By the same token you can’t possibly know what the EU will look like in the future yet to decided to remain in it

We know what the terms of our membership are and that it includes being able to keep existing conditions without requirement for any further integration, and that any further integration Britain wishes to be included in, would require a UK referendum to do so. Much more certainty than leaving.

 

[Triggaaar]

Yes because sheep and simpletons believed a load of LIES.

We know what the terms of our membership are and that it includes being able to keep existing conditions without requirement for any further integration, and that any further integration Britain wishes to be included in, would require a UK referendum to do so. Much more certainty than leaving.

These opinions have been expressed many times in this thread. Does anyone post anything new?

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

These opinions have been expressed many times in this thread. Does anyone post anything new?

Yep, even Solomon in all his wisdom said there's nothing new under the sun.

 

[Baldseagull]

These opinions have been expressed many times in this thread. Does anyone post anything new?

Not in between developments, no, not really. If the same argument comes out that remaining was as much a stab in the dark as leaving, then it gets the same response to show that it wasn't.

 

[Dorset Seagull]

Yes because sheep and simpletons believed a load of LIES. There was no real research into the impact carried out at that time.

You can't tell me my mate Ash on Facebook voted leave because he understood the impact now, he voted solely based on immigration and that he thought anyone not with a British passport or visa will be deported.

I’m sorry you lost me at sheep and simpletons. This would be a really interesting discussion thread if it weren’t for comments like that.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

We know what the terms of our membership are and that it includes being able to keep existing conditions without requirement for any further integration, and that any further integration Britain wishes to be included in, would require a UK referendum to do so. Much more certainty than leaving.

Only half true. Any changes via treaty and yes we get a referendum and could veto the changes. Any changes via regulations we can't veto as it's majority voting.

 

[Springal]

I’m sorry you lost me at sheep and simpletons. This would be a really interesting discussion thread if it weren’t for comments like that.

It is true though. Many people that voted Leave don't really know why or understand what the impact is / was at all. Yes I expect some who voted Leave did research and have some understanding, but many did not. This is why Leavers are scared of a second vote now everyone has more detailed research into the impact of leaving the EU, and/or with/without a deal.

Many of the people I know that voted leave also use Facebook as Google for questions like 'Does anyone know what date the kids go back to school after Christmas?'

Yet we expect these same people KNEW what they were voting for in the Brexit vote.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Theresa May is going to visit the Irish border tomorrow and give another one of her meaningless speeches with zero substance. That'll be a real game changer I'm sure.

Light rain and a moderate breeze forecast up there tomorrow. I hope she gets soaked.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Yes because sheep and simpletons believed a load of LIES. There was no real research into the impact carried out at that time.

You can't tell me my mate Ash on Facebook voted leave because he understood the impact now, he voted solely based on immigration and that he thought anyone not with a British passport or visa will be deported.

So you want a change to have a majority ( which this did ) BUT that majority only counts if the majority doesn't include sheep and simpletons .... defined by whom ? You ?

 

[Springal]

So you want a change to have a majority ( which this did ) BUT that majority only counts if the majority doesn't include sheep and simpletons .... defined by whom ? You ?

Good idea, maybe an IQ test before Brexit might have made a difference ;-)

Genuine question though, with a factual based document presented to voters why would you not support a second referendum?

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Good idea, maybe an IQ test before Brexit might have made a difference ;-)

Genuine question though, with a factual based document presented to voters why would you not support a second referendum?

The government sent out a 'factual' propaganda document before the referendum anyway.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Good idea, maybe an IQ test before Brexit might have made a difference ;-)

Genuine question though, with a factual based document presented to voters why would you not support a second referendum?

You have two challenges with those questions :

1. Who defines what is factual ? A lot of what was said on both sides was 'if you do x then y will happen' - all guess work presented as facts.

2. What happens if any second referendum goes the other way, especially by a similar margin ? As a leave voter I'd feel very betrayed ( and yes I'd vote leave again ). IMHO a second referedum could make the country even more split.