The People's Vote - which way would you vote?
Poll: The People's Vote - which way would you vote?
Total Members Polled: 1247
Discussion
Earthdweller said:
I agree .. going back in would be:
accepting the Euro and losing the pound
Losing fiscal and policy control
Joining the Schengen zone
Joining the EU Army
Etc etc .. how many of those that bought the remain scaremongering would accept the new revised terms ?
Where is there a copy of the new revised terms? Or is it something else made by PH team leave.accepting the Euro and losing the pound
Losing fiscal and policy control
Joining the Schengen zone
Joining the EU Army
Etc etc .. how many of those that bought the remain scaremongering would accept the new revised terms ?
Ghibli said:
Earthdweller said:
I agree .. going back in would be:
accepting the Euro and losing the pound
Losing fiscal and policy control
Joining the Schengen zone
Joining the EU Army
Etc etc .. how many of those that bought the remain scaremongering would accept the new revised terms ?
Where is there a copy of the new revised terms? Or is it something else made by PH team leave.accepting the Euro and losing the pound
Losing fiscal and policy control
Joining the Schengen zone
Joining the EU Army
Etc etc .. how many of those that bought the remain scaremongering would accept the new revised terms ?
Helicopter123 said:
Ghibli said:
Earthdweller said:
I agree .. going back in would be:
accepting the Euro and losing the pound
Losing fiscal and policy control
Joining the Schengen zone
Joining the EU Army
Etc etc .. how many of those that bought the remain scaremongering would accept the new revised terms ?
Where is there a copy of the new revised terms? Or is it something else made by PH team leave.accepting the Euro and losing the pound
Losing fiscal and policy control
Joining the Schengen zone
Joining the EU Army
Etc etc .. how many of those that bought the remain scaremongering would accept the new revised terms ?
The existing deal ceased to be on the 23rd June 2016, the EU stated as much, did you miss that?
Any concessions Cameron negotiated prior to the referendum ceased to be, and any rebate/vetoes the UK had won't exist should the UK choose to remain a member as a result of a 2nd referendum.
There will be a new relationship between the EU & the UK should the UK change it's path and remain.
The evidence for such is overwhelming, it's obvious as to why Remainers deny it, because they know another vote will inevitably lead to a bigger majority to Leave the EU.
I'd welcome a 2nd referendum once the new terms were published, which is an inevitability with another referendum which included an option to remain,
Tuna said:
Helicopter123 said:
Chequers is worse, but far preferable to only other outcome now, the disasterous no deal Brexit.
If you want to convince me, you need to explain what the Chequers customs processing proposal is. I know you can't, and won't, but just showing you understand what it is you're talking about would be nice.Oh, and if you can justify having to follow EU regulation whilst vacating the seat on the committee(s) that decide those regulations, I'll be really impressed.
When called out on these, they just ignore that part of the conversation and move on to other 'fake news'.
I'd like to believe the Remain campaign had some honesty, that there were genuine reasons for staying in the EU. But the 'ambassadors' on here lie, distort or simply ignore basic verifiable information just so they can continue to argue their religious convictions.
How can a second Referendum have any validity whatsoever, when the people calling for it wouldn't recognise the truth if it slapped them in the face?
This isn't just aimed at Heli. Trolleys, Piha and a bunch of others just seem to have a tenuous grasp on reality. It's depressing that these people are distorting political debate so badly. It's not that I need or want them to have a particular political leaning, or even support Brexit. I'd just like them to stop bulls
tting when there are some genuine points worth discussing here.Edited by Tuna on Tuesday 13th November 23:05
Tuna said:
Tuna said:
Helicopter123 said:
Chequers is worse, but far preferable to only other outcome now, the disasterous no deal Brexit.
If you want to convince me, you need to explain what the Chequers customs processing proposal is. I know you can't, and won't, but just showing you understand what it is you're talking about would be nice.Oh, and if you can justify having to follow EU regulation whilst vacating the seat on the committee(s) that decide those regulations, I'll be really impressed.
When called out on these, they just ignore that part of the conversation and move on to other 'fake news'.
I'd like to believe the Remain campaign had some honesty, that there were genuine reasons for staying in the EU. But the 'ambassadors' on here lie, distort or simply ignore basic verifiable information just so they can continue to argue their religious convictions.
How can a second Referendum have any validity whatsoever, when the people calling for it wouldn't recognise the truth if it slapped them in the face?
This isn't just aimed at Heli. Trolleys, Piha and a bunch of others just seem to have a tenuous grasp on reality. It's depressing that these people are distorting political debate so badly. It's not that I need or want them to have a particular political leaning, or even support Brexit. I'd just like them to stop bulls
tting when there are some genuine points worth discussing here.Edited by Tuna on Tuesday 13th November 23:05
Waiting to see what has been agreed tomorrow and what the reaction of the levers will be.
It’s hard to believe there is something that the Eu and the government can agree on that will have the pro leave voters happy with the outcome.
If the more hard line leaver MPs are not happy with the deal, then May will need the support of the Labour Party to get the vote through. How feked up would that be....?
It’s hard to believe there is something that the Eu and the government can agree on that will have the pro leave voters happy with the outcome.
If the more hard line leaver MPs are not happy with the deal, then May will need the support of the Labour Party to get the vote through. How feked up would that be....?
Tuna said:
Tuna said:
Helicopter123 said:
Chequers is worse, but far preferable to only other outcome now, the disasterous no deal Brexit.
If you want to convince me, you need to explain what the Chequers customs processing proposal is. I know you can't, and won't, but just showing you understand what it is you're talking about would be nice.Oh, and if you can justify having to follow EU regulation whilst vacating the seat on the committee(s) that decide those regulations, I'll be really impressed.
When called out on these, they just ignore that part of the conversation and move on to other 'fake news'.
I'd like to believe the Remain campaign had some honesty, that there were genuine reasons for staying in the EU. But the 'ambassadors' on here lie, distort or simply ignore basic verifiable information just so they can continue to argue their religious convictions.
How can a second Referendum have any validity whatsoever, when the people calling for it wouldn't recognise the truth if it slapped them in the face?
This isn't just aimed at Heli. Trolleys, Piha and a bunch of others just seem to have a tenuous grasp on reality. It's depressing that these people are distorting political debate so badly. It's not that I need or want them to have a particular political leaning, or even support Brexit. I'd just like them to stop bulls
tting when there are some genuine points worth discussing here.Edited by Tuna on Tuesday 13th November 23:05
TTmonkey said:
Waiting to see what has been agreed tomorrow and what the reaction of the levers will be.
It’s hard to believe there is something that the Eu and the government can agree on that will have the pro leave voters happy with the outcome.
If the more hard line leaver MPs are not happy with the deal, then May will need the support of the Labour Party to get the vote through. How feked up would that be....?
They'll love it, something they can properly moan about. The last think any of them want is for Brexit to be a success.It’s hard to believe there is something that the Eu and the government can agree on that will have the pro leave voters happy with the outcome.
If the more hard line leaver MPs are not happy with the deal, then May will need the support of the Labour Party to get the vote through. How feked up would that be....?
Helicopter123 said:
Tuna said:
Tuna said:
Helicopter123 said:
Chequers is worse, but far preferable to only other outcome now, the disasterous no deal Brexit.
If you want to convince me, you need to explain what the Chequers customs processing proposal is. I know you can't, and won't, but just showing you understand what it is you're talking about would be nice.Oh, and if you can justify having to follow EU regulation whilst vacating the seat on the committee(s) that decide those regulations, I'll be really impressed.
When called out on these, they just ignore that part of the conversation and move on to other 'fake news'.
I'd like to believe the Remain campaign had some honesty, that there were genuine reasons for staying in the EU. But the 'ambassadors' on here lie, distort or simply ignore basic verifiable information just so they can continue to argue their religious convictions.
How can a second Referendum have any validity whatsoever, when the people calling for it wouldn't recognise the truth if it slapped them in the face?
This isn't just aimed at Heli. Trolleys, Piha and a bunch of others just seem to have a tenuous grasp on reality. It's depressing that these people are distorting political debate so badly. It's not that I need or want them to have a particular political leaning, or even support Brexit. I'd just like them to stop bulls
tting when there are some genuine points worth discussing here.Edited by Tuna on Tuesday 13th November 23:05
You lie, and misrepresent what people write,
You then suggest the opposing poster does exactly what you do, when presented with the evidence that clearly demonstrates you were in the wrong, you swerve coming back to the point, you did the very same earlier tonight.
It's a recurring theme with you, it's an expectation you never fail to live down to.
Helicopter123 said:
So, here is a genuine question.
If faced with this choice, and this choice alone, what would you accept?
1. Chequers +
2. 2nd referendum, Remain versus No Deal Brexit.
I think this is what it’s going to boil down to in parliament.
For me, it’s another referendum.
But the Art.50 declaration cannot unilaterally be revoked. Hence, your no 2 choice is out. If faced with this choice, and this choice alone, what would you accept?
1. Chequers +
2. 2nd referendum, Remain versus No Deal Brexit.
I think this is what it’s going to boil down to in parliament.
For me, it’s another referendum.
gooner1 said:
amusingduck said:
Tuna said:
Helicopter123 said:
Those are DExEU/ONS stats.
No, they aren't. https://fullfact.org/europe/viral-image-brexit-cos...Fullfact said:
We don’t know what the impact of Brexit will be on jobs, but there’s no evidence in the government report to support the graphic’s calculations
Fullfact said:
It says that the no deal scenario will mean the economy having “£158 billion less per year”. This is actually how much less the economy might grow by over a fifteen year period, not one year.
They are outright lies, that have at best a tenuous relationship to the DExEU stats. Is this the sort of 'information' you're basing your posts on?
Edited by amusingduck on Tuesday 13th November 07:55
obviously a mistake on his behalf.
After all, no one would deliberately post " outright lies" in order to attempt to mislead posters.
Would they?
could you point me to which page it was on? Ta.
Ghibli said:
Brexit doesn't look anything like the Prime Minister May said it would look like
A deal that nobody wants.
Not surprising is it, May has been thwarting Brexit since taking office, it'a shame it took so long for May to admit it when she revealed her true colours in July, and you to finally admit it.A deal that nobody wants.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff