The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (61 Viewers)

[Deleted member 5849]

Oh yeah Corbyn and his communist buddies are so much better

rofl.

In case you hadn't noticed, Corbyn is not Prime Minister. There's only one racist lying joke as PM and, if Corbyn and co are communist, then that must make Johnson akin to Mussolini.

Except he won't even make the trains run on time.

 

---

[skybluetony176]

 

[skybluetony176]

What’s that got to do with anything? Lab want a CU and SNP and Dems want to revoke so of course they reject it. Doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be scrutinised if you want it to go through.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you believe what they say they have the numbers anyway.

 

[skybluetony176]

How about we have a second referendum with either No Deal or Boris deal? Seems fair don't it

Ahh, you mean shoot yourself in two feet vs shoot yourself in one foot. No chance of having don’t shoot yourself in either foot?

 

[ccfc92]

View attachment 13275

You do know, you saying "If you don’t let me win I’m going to take my ball back. What an absolute child" is exactly what people trying to overturn the vote are doing?

 

[skybluetony176]

You do know, you saying "If you don’t let me win I’m going to take my ball back. What an absolute child" is exactly what people trying to overturn the vote are doing?

A second referendum would be a rematch. Boris isn’t even willing to let the first match get to full time.

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

You do know, you saying "If you don’t let me win I’m going to take my ball back. What an absolute child" is exactly what people trying to overturn the vote are doing?

A second referendum would be a rematch. Boris isn’t even willing to let the first match get to full time.

Hahahaha rematch only because you can't accept the result.....

Sorry 17.4 million voters, we have to have a rematch because Tony said so

 

[skybluetony176]

People should remember that when things don’t get scrutinised in Parliament correctly we do things like invade Iraq. We really should have learned our lesson by now and unilaterally support scrutiny of this bill in Parliament.

 

[skybluetony176]

Hahahaha rematch only because you can't accept the result.....

Sorry 17.4 million voters, we have to have a rematch because Tony said so

It would be more sensible than taking your ball away during match 1

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

It would be more sensible than taking your ball away during match 1

Mate the game is over, full time, leave won get over it

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Mate the game is over

One more experience, one more entry, in a diary self-penned.

 

[skybluetony176]

Mate the game is over, full time, leave won get over it

It ain’t over until the paperwork is done. Unfortunately for leavers we have a PM who doesn’t want the T’s crossing and the I’s dotting so would rather not complete the game instead.

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

One more experience, one more entry, in a diary self-penned.

It ain’t over until the paperwork is done. Unfortunately for leavers we have a PM who doesn’t want the T’s crossing and the I’s dotting so would rather not complete the game instead.

Accept it fellas, if it was the other way round we'd have accepted it years ago.... can't ya both see how childish it looks

 

[SIR ERNIE]

Nah. I can move countries and earn enough to be cushioned from any economic impact.

Weren’t you whining recently about not being able to afford a home?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Accept it fellas, if it was the other way round we'd have accepted it years ago.... can't ya both see how childish it looks

How is Johnson's the best deal to leave the EU?

How is it better than May'[s deal?

Why are both deals better than no deal?

Why are all of the above better than staying?

Why was May's deal the best way to leave, but it is now right it was rejected (by the likes of Johnson)? Why could the current Prime Minister not accept leaving, and worked to obstruct it?

Are the DUP now ardent remoaners, as they oppose this deal?

You must answer each question in a minimum of two sentences, with at least 52% of the words including two or more syllables.

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

How is Johnson's the best deal to leave the EU?

How is it better than May'[s deal?

Why are both deals better than no deal?

Why are all of the above better than staying?

Why was May's deal the best way to leave, but it is now right it was rejected (by the likes of Johnson)? Why could the current Prime Minister not accept leaving, and worked to obstruct it?

Are the DUP now ardent remoaners, as they oppose this deal?

You must answer each question in a minimum of two sentences, with at least 52% of the words including two or more syllables.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

 

[Alan Dugdales Moustache]

How about we have a second referendum with either No Deal or Boris deal? Seems fair don't it

No no no Dom you can't do that. You can't include any second referendum that doesn't include remain.
We live in an inclusive world and your suggestion is totally unfair because there's nothing in it for remainers. Remember, the first referendum doesn't count because the result went wrong for those who don't like change and anyway, most of those who voted leave are nearly all dead now . (as they were 6 months after the vote )

 

[Sick Boy]

Is it? So what’s the issue with Johnson then?

In what way?

 

[ccfctommy]

Anyone else wish we hadn't bothered with any of this? What do we actually have to gain?

 

[Sick Boy]

Anyone else wish we hadn't bothered with any of this? What do we actually have to gain?

Good question. The average person will notice very little apart from their rights being taken away.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

What do we actually have to gain?

The last four dozen pages of this thread succinctly sum up all the benefits.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Accept it fellas, if it was the other way round we'd have accepted it years ago.... can't ya both see how childish it looks

So you're saying that there aren't people that have been fighting to get out since our decision to join in 1972? They've spent over 40 years complaining about the situation and trying to push us out. They had a referendum in 1975. They tried it under Maggie but got blown out the water because she negotiated a rebate. Still they didn't (and haven't) shut up.

 

[Grendel]

So you're saying that there aren't people that have been fighting to get out since our decision to join in 1972? They've spent over 40 years complaining about the situation and trying to push us out. They had a referendum in 1975. They tried it under Maggie but got blown out the water because she negotiated a rebate. Still they didn't (and haven't) shut up.

The referendum in 1975 when cabinet ministers minutes were suppressed which briefed specifically not to reveal the true intent of the EU you mean?

 

[shmmeee]

Oh yeah Corbyn and his communist buddies are so much better

Fuck me. 1983 called, it’d like its insults for lefties back.

Anyone else wish we hadn't bothered with any of this? What do we actually have to gain?

Literally nothing.

 

[shmmeee]

No no no Dom you can't do that. You can't include any second referendum that doesn't include remain.
We live in an inclusive world and your suggestion is totally unfair because there's nothing in it for remainers. Remember, the first referendum doesn't count because the result went wrong for those who don't like change and anyway, most of those who voted leave are nearly all dead now . (as they were 6 months after the vote )

There are leading Brexiters who have stated they’d rather Remain than have CU/No Deal. Are they not Leavey enough now?

Besides, as keeps being pointed out this is a second referendum and we let you have leave on it.

Also, the first referendum says nothing about how we leave, why wouldn’t you check if this is good enough?

But you know all these arguments and are just scared that the majority aren’t on your side any more.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

The referendum in 1975 when cabinet ministers minutes were suppressed which briefed specifically not to reveal the true intent of the EU you mean?

Or the 2016 referendum where the main protagonists went around claiming outcomes and deals which were completely and utterly unfeasible, toured the country with a bus with a message on the side which if you're being very, very kind would be described as a mistruth (but more accurately described as a lie) and who said NI would be unaffected by us leaving?

 

[Grendel]

Or the 2016 referendum where the main protagonists went around claiming outcomes and deals which were completely and utterly unfeasible, toured the country with a bus with a message on the side which if you're being very, very kind would be described as a mistruth (but more accurately described as a lie) and who said NI would be unaffected by us leaving?

The actual slogan was not a lie and there was ample opportunity for the other side to make the obvious comments against it

All I see on this thread though is an idea to win - one way or the other 50% will lose and until someone wakes up to that nothing will change

 

[Grendel]

There are leading Brexiters who have stated they’d rather Remain than have CU/No Deal. Are they not Leavey enough now?

Besides, as keeps being pointed out this is a second referendum and we let you have leave on it.

Also, the first referendum says nothing about how we leave, why wouldn’t you check if this is good enough?

But you know all these arguments and are just scared that the majority aren’t on your side any more.

Primary school drivel

 

[Deleted member 5849]

But you know all these arguments and are just scared that the majority aren’t on your side any more.

The argument made by many righties that Corbyn's scared of an election because he knows he'll lose tends to be forgotten when reflected back on themselves...

 

[Grendel]

The argument made by many righties that Corbyn's scared of an election because he knows he'll lose tends to be forgotten when reflected back on themselves...

Who would actually win in a second referendum?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

All I see on this thread though is an idea to win - one way or the other 50% will lose and until someone wakes up to that nothing will change

tbf you help to contribute to that!

I agree on a philosophical level but, what do you do? The soft options antagonise hard righties as they're not separatist enough, and end up with the country worse off than under the current status quo and will therefore antagonise dribbling europhiles (although worth noting that for one such europhile, Ken Clarke has made mighty steps to try to compromise his beliefs to help the country move forward. If only some of the righteous righties had been prepared to do the same, eh!). So... you still end up having a sizeable number who 'lose' in the compromise situation that pleases nobody.

Ultimately, it's been bungled too much, and it needs some bravery to take a step back and re-set. The goivernment needs to consult with the opposition and reach a consensus, if that isn't possible then we need some indicative votes for preferred way forward and, if they don't work, we need a number of options put on the table to the people... but that's a very complicated public vote, and arguably too complicated so therefore we shouldn't even get to that stage.

Parliament's system is too black and white really. They had the chance when they did indicative votes last time but, really, having failed to get a majority for anything, there ought to have been the chance to knock out the tailenders and run the votes again, looking for that consensus.

 

[Grendel]

tbf you help to contribute to that!

I agree on a philosophical level but, what do you do? The soft options antagonise hard righties, and end up with the country worse off than under the current status quo and will therefore antagonise dribbling europhiles (although worth noting that for one such europhile, Ken Clarke has made mighty steps to try to compromise his beliefs to help the country move forward. If only some of the righteous righties had been prepared to do the same, eh!). So... you still end up having a sizeable number who 'lose' in the compromise situation that pleases nobody.

Ultimately, it's been bungled too much, and it needs some bravery to take a step back and re-set. The goivernment needs to consult with the opposition and reach a consensus, if that isn't possible then we need some indicative votes for preferred way forward and, if they don't work, we need a number of options put on the table to the people... but that's a very complicated public vote, and arguably too complicated so therefore we shouldn't even get to that stage.

Parliament's system is too black and white really. They had the chance when they did indicative votes last time but, really, having failed to get a majority for anything, there ought to have been the chance to knock out the tailenders and run the votes again, looking for that consensus.

One thing we have to do is leave. Under whatever guise that is we have to leave the EU

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

The actual slogan was not a lie and there was ample opportunity for the other side to make the obvious comments against it

All I see on this thread though is an idea to win - one way or the other 50% will lose and until someone wakes up to that nothing will change

Hence why I said at best it was a mistruth.

The other side did make comments against it. Even independent fact finders and journalists questioned them on it numerous times stating how the figure was grossly misleading as it didn't include the rebate or money we got back. There is the famous clip of Alexander being probed on the claim by a journalist ON THE BUS.

Personally I think the first sentence on that bus was grossly and intentionally misleading. The second about spending the money on the NHS was what was a lie, because you couldn't spend £350m a week on the NHS without finding the best part of an extra £100m from somewhere else.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

One thing we have to do is leave. Under whatever guise that is we have to leave the EU

I disagree. Again, you're reducing it to a binary. Leaving with no deal, would be a catastrophe, Johnson's deal is near that. Even May's deal not good at all... and it's always missed, of course, that both of these deals don't protect against economic and social armageddon, they just kick the can down the road for the same arguments to be made with a different goal at the end of it.

What we have to do, is do what's 'best'. If that ends up leaving with no deal then so be it, but *all* options (including no deal and remain) have to be on the table in debate to make it 'fair', as all compromises such as EEA still end up as divisive as the extreme ends!

It needs an adult conversation about what's actually 'best'. it needs, dare I say it, experts rather than politicians to be consulted, it needs proper reports and conclusions unfiltered by the political whim of the Prime Minister, leader of the opposition, or Scotland's largest party, let alone a bunch of nutcases from NI. It needs consequences, benefits, and ramifications of *all* options to be considered.

If politicians actually did that (ha!) we wouldn't need any more referenda (is that the plural? referendi?).