Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)

Visit the current forum | Forum Rules

Page 969 of 1552 < 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 >

Midlands Eagle 02 Apr 19 2.16pm
Originally posted by Pussay Patrol Throwing facts at a brexiter is like throwing holy water on a vampire As you refuse to debate sensibly I am excluding you for 48 hours

Midlands Eagle

02 Apr 19 2.16pm

Originally posted by Pussay Patrol

Throwing facts at a brexiter is like throwing holy water on a vampire

As you refuse to debate sensibly I am excluding you for 48 hours

Matov 02 Apr 19 2.25pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger So your reasoning is that Parliament can just ignore the referendum because Parliament conspired to reject every possible way to implement it? Is that the stupidest logic ever? I think Parliament need to now either put up or shut up. We need to see a simple choice offered to them of leaving on April 12th with no deal or else revoking Article 50. This needs settling, one way or the other. Yes, utter mayhem ensues and the Leave campaign continues but at least Parliament would have asserted itself one way or the other. If they revoke it, then the country faces a crisis almost unprecedented in peace-time but at least they have been honest with us. Better that than a rigged second referendum which offers nothing by way of settlement and merely fans the flames in a way that threatens to consume everything we have left as a nation. If I ever vote again, my vote goes simply to the party offering me the swiftest departure from the EU but our Parliament needs to regain a modicum of self-respect and it does that by holdings its own, simple, leave or remain vote. No party whips, no pressure from leaders but a chance to show the British public whether or not they meant what they said in terms of honouring the result on June 23rd 2016. Would rather somebody looked me in the eyes before stabbing me than plunge a knife into my back. "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Matov

02 Apr 19 2.25pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

So your reasoning is that Parliament can just ignore the referendum because Parliament conspired to reject every possible way to implement it?

Is that the stupidest logic ever?

I think Parliament need to now either put up or shut up. We need to see a simple choice offered to them of leaving on April 12th with no deal or else revoking Article 50. This needs settling, one way or the other.

Yes, utter mayhem ensues and the Leave campaign continues but at least Parliament would have asserted itself one way or the other.

If they revoke it, then the country faces a crisis almost unprecedented in peace-time but at least they have been honest with us.

Better that than a rigged second referendum which offers nothing by way of settlement and merely fans the flames in a way that threatens to consume everything we have left as a nation.

If I ever vote again, my vote goes simply to the party offering me the swiftest departure from the EU but our Parliament needs to regain a modicum of self-respect and it does that by holdings its own, simple, leave or remain vote. No party whips, no pressure from leaders but a chance to show the British public whether or not they meant what they said in terms of honouring the result on June 23rd 2016.

Would rather somebody looked me in the eyes before stabbing me than plunge a knife into my back.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Maine Eagle USA 02 Apr 19 2.28pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger So your reasoning is that Parliament can just ignore the referendum because Parliament conspired to reject every possible way to implement it? Is that the stupidest logic ever? I take it you dont rate my logic, Hrolf, I think you might have mentioned that before? About 40 times What I am writing here is basically the situation as I see it. The main point I am reasoning about is that big business in the UK will never allow a no deal brexit. Politicians still march to the drum of industry and economy. So making that assumption, and its a big one I admit, there is only a small number of options left to finally resolve this. Sorry to say but your idea of excluding parliamentary votes from people that you dont agree with, is nothing short of completely ridiculous. Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle

USA 02 Apr 19 2.28pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

So your reasoning is that Parliament can just ignore the referendum because Parliament conspired to reject every possible way to implement it?

Is that the stupidest logic ever?

I take it you dont rate my logic, Hrolf, I think you might have mentioned that before? About 40 times

What I am writing here is basically the situation as I see it.

The main point I am reasoning about is that big business in the UK will never allow a no deal brexit. Politicians still march to the drum of industry and economy.

So making that assumption, and its a big one I admit, there is only a small number of options left to finally resolve this.

Sorry to say but your idea of excluding parliamentary votes from people that you dont agree with, is nothing short of completely ridiculous.

Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle USA 02 Apr 19 2.49pm
Originally posted by Matov A second referendum solves nothing. Merely adds fuel to the fire with consequences that do not bear considering. If the result on June 23rd is ignored, then any further such exercises in democracy have zero legitimacy. And if there is a mass boycott, then it descends into farce. If Remainers refuse to accept the result of a referendum with the turn out on June 23rd, then why would anybody treat any subsequent one, with less people taking part, any more seriously? Yes, we might remain in the EU but it leads to DECADES of conflict in every conceivable way. It very well might be the only way out of this. Unlike the first binary referendum to a non binary question, this one would be linked to actual deliverables. It would have May’s deal sitting there, ready to be passed, already aligned with the EU. It would be a vote on tangible and deliverable options, not a vote on something which is undeliverable, like in 2016. The options would be pre agreed and sitting there ready to be implemented. There was nothing sitting there in 2016, as we all know. It was smoke and mirrors on both sides. It must inlude an option to remain, if people who have been learning and understanding more about what leaving really means, now feel differently. I understand how leavers don’t like that, but it simply has to be an option. Regarding a boycott or the illegitimacy of a second vote, in any vote if you want your voice heard, don’t boycott it. May’s deal or some other kind of Brexit could still win in a public vote. 3 years have passed, nothing has been accomplished. A different way forward is needed and that is one of the options. Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle

USA 02 Apr 19 2.49pm

Originally posted by Matov

A second referendum solves nothing. Merely adds fuel to the fire with consequences that do not bear considering.

If the result on June 23rd is ignored, then any further such exercises in democracy have zero legitimacy.

And if there is a mass boycott, then it descends into farce.

If Remainers refuse to accept the result of a referendum with the turn out on June 23rd, then why would anybody treat any subsequent one, with less people taking part, any more seriously?

Yes, we might remain in the EU but it leads to DECADES of conflict in every conceivable way.

It very well might be the only way out of this.

Unlike the first binary referendum to a non binary question, this one would be linked to actual deliverables.

It would have May’s deal sitting there, ready to be passed, already aligned with the EU. It would be a vote on tangible and deliverable options, not a vote on something which is undeliverable, like in 2016. The options would be pre agreed and sitting there ready to be implemented.

There was nothing sitting there in 2016, as we all know. It was smoke and mirrors on both sides.

It must inlude an option to remain, if people who have been learning and understanding more about what leaving really means, now feel differently. I understand how leavers don’t like that, but it simply has to be an option.

Regarding a boycott or the illegitimacy of a second vote, in any vote if you want your voice heard, don’t boycott it. May’s deal or some other kind of Brexit could still win in a public vote.

3 years have passed, nothing has been accomplished.

A different way forward is needed and that is one of the options.

Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

jeeagles 02 Apr 19 2.56pm
Originally posted by kenbarr The results of the June 23rd vote were based on a series of campaign "promises" that may or may not be true. The chief one for me is the point made by Boris Johnson that there was an instant savings of £300 million plus to be had if Brexit happened. That has been disputed and is now considered by many to be false based on the Article 50 negotiations. Recent polling suggests that many of the "swing" areas of England where the previous referendum was decided have had a change of heart. That also may or may not be so, polling is not the exact science it has been sold to be. Most of my political experience, which dates back to 1964, tells me the first vote was not decisive. 52-53% in a national vote with wide disparities amongst the regions tells me the nation was then and still is divided fairly closely on the issue. I have quite conflicting views and would probably decide which way I would vote at the last minute. Brussels is a vast unelected decision making power with very few checks or balances. It would appear to me that the one elected European body, the Parliament, is little more than advisory. The theory of economic convergence amongst over two dozen sovereign countries has not worked. Certainly the EU has not been the best it could be. However, I believe for this world to survive national borders and regional sovereignty must yield towards a world government. Are we there yet? Certainly not. When written in the mid 1960s, "Star Trek," where such a society is theorized, took place 300 hundred years (middle 22nd Century) in the future after a cataclysmic war that ended only when the discovery of a radically new means of propulsion which makes inter-stellar exploration possible. That isn't even close to happening. Therefore, reform of the EU is an absolute must if the UK can continue within it. David Cameron tried to achieve such reform and was rebuffed. Therefore, when the referendum occurred, the British electorate had to weigh whether Britain had the influence necessary to achieve the reform required. The evaluation then was small majority thought not. That may have changed since but that's also highly questionable. My own view, for what it's worth, is that economically Britain would be better off remaining but politically its influence in how the EU is run must be felt if continued membership is to have any meaning. Therefore, color me a reluctant Remainer with a healthy dose of scepticism. I don't think the campaign lies arguement works. Politicians always lie. Project fear has been grossly over exaggerated. EU reform would be the best outcome for everyone. Currently too many MEPs and civil servants on the commission are too convinced that it's the greatest thing ever and ever closer union is the answer too any problems it may have. They will not identify or address any of the issues it have. The UKIP threat to it was completely ignored as they were branded racist right wing outcasts. AdF have just been vocally critical of the EU over brexit and they have been ignored as they've been branded racists right wing outcasts. The banding may be true to an exent. But that's not a good enough reason to ignore the problem.

jeeagles

02 Apr 19 2.56pm

Originally posted by kenbarr

The results of the June 23rd vote were based on a series of campaign "promises" that may or may not be true. The chief one for me is the point made by Boris Johnson that there was an instant savings of £300 million plus to be had if Brexit happened. That has been disputed and is now considered by many to be false based on the Article 50 negotiations. Recent polling suggests that many of the "swing" areas of England where the previous referendum was decided have had a change of heart. That also may or may not be so, polling is not the exact science it has been sold to be. Most of my political experience, which dates back to 1964, tells me the first vote was not decisive. 52-53% in a national vote with wide disparities amongst the regions tells me the nation was then and still is divided fairly closely on the issue. I have quite conflicting views and would probably decide which way I would vote at the last minute. Brussels is a vast unelected decision making power with very few checks or balances. It would appear to me that the one elected European body, the Parliament, is little more than advisory. The theory of economic convergence amongst over two dozen sovereign countries has not worked. Certainly the EU has not been the best it could be. However, I believe for this world to survive national borders and regional sovereignty must yield towards a world government. Are we there yet? Certainly not. When written in the mid 1960s, "Star Trek," where such a society is theorized, took place 300 hundred years (middle 22nd Century) in the future after a cataclysmic war that ended only when the discovery of a radically new means of propulsion which makes inter-stellar exploration possible. That isn't even close to happening. Therefore, reform of the EU is an absolute must if the UK can continue within it. David Cameron tried to achieve such reform and was rebuffed. Therefore, when the referendum occurred, the British electorate had to weigh whether Britain had the influence necessary to achieve the reform required. The evaluation then was small majority thought not. That may have changed since but that's also highly questionable. My own view, for what it's worth, is that economically Britain would be better off remaining but politically its influence in how the EU is run must be felt if continued membership is to have any meaning. Therefore, color me a reluctant Remainer with a healthy dose of scepticism.

I don't think the campaign lies arguement works. Politicians always lie. Project fear has been grossly over exaggerated.

EU reform would be the best outcome for everyone. Currently too many MEPs and civil servants on the commission are too convinced that it's the greatest thing ever and ever closer union is the answer too any problems it may have. They will not identify or address any of the issues it have.

The UKIP threat to it was completely ignored as they were branded racist right wing outcasts.

AdF have just been vocally critical of the EU over brexit and they have been ignored as they've been branded racists right wing outcasts.

The banding may be true to an exent. But that's not a good enough reason to ignore the problem.

Hrolf The Ganger 02 Apr 19 2.57pm
Originally posted by Maine Eagle I take it you dont rate my logic, Hrolf, I think you might have mentioned that before? About 40 times What I am writing here is basically the situation as I see it. The main point I am reasoning about is that big business in the UK will never allow a no deal brexit. Politicians still march to the drum of industry and economy. So making that assumption, and its a big one I admit, there is only a small number of options left to finally resolve this. Sorry to say but your idea of excluding parliamentary votes from people that you dont agree with, is nothing short of completely ridiculous. So you find it acceptable that business controls Parliament and democracy has no effect? I don't find that acceptable. Of course, you don't live in Britain do you? You live in a country that was founded on 'We the People' Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (02 Apr 2019 2.57pm)

Hrolf The Ganger

02 Apr 19 2.57pm

Originally posted by Maine Eagle

I take it you dont rate my logic, Hrolf, I think you might have mentioned that before? About 40 times

What I am writing here is basically the situation as I see it.

The main point I am reasoning about is that big business in the UK will never allow a no deal brexit. Politicians still march to the drum of industry and economy.

So making that assumption, and its a big one I admit, there is only a small number of options left to finally resolve this.

Sorry to say but your idea of excluding parliamentary votes from people that you dont agree with, is nothing short of completely ridiculous.

So you find it acceptable that business controls Parliament and democracy has no effect?

I don't find that acceptable.

Of course, you don't live in Britain do you? You live in a country that was founded on 'We the People'

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (02 Apr 2019 2.57pm)

steeleye20 Croydon 02 Apr 19 2.58pm
Originally posted by Pussay Patrol Well if we've learnt anything these last few years it's don't listen to politicians and stick to the facts. It's all there in the white paper That is so right, and of course manifesto promises are broken all the time, not that they are not meant but because government brings a new world of reality.

steeleye20

Croydon 02 Apr 19 2.58pm

Originally posted by Pussay Patrol

Well if we've learnt anything these last few years it's don't listen to politicians and stick to the facts. It's all there in the white paper

That is so right, and of course manifesto promises are broken all the time, not that they are not meant but because government brings a new world of reality.

Maine Eagle USA 02 Apr 19 3.00pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger So you find it acceptable that business controls Parliament and democracy has no effect? I don't find that acceptable. Of course, you don't live in Britain do you? You live in a country that was founded on 'We the People' Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (02 Apr 2019 2.57pm) Business has a voice, that is the way of the world. Democracy is not what happened in 2016. An undeliverable vote happened in 2016. Guess what, 3 years later, it is still undeliverable. A vote which cannot be delivered on, is undemocratic, one could argue? I spent the first 25 years of my life living in Britain. Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle

USA 02 Apr 19 3.00pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

So you find it acceptable that business controls Parliament and democracy has no effect?

I don't find that acceptable.

Of course, you don't live in Britain do you? You live in a country that was founded on 'We the People'

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (02 Apr 2019 2.57pm)

Business has a voice, that is the way of the world.

Democracy is not what happened in 2016. An undeliverable vote happened in 2016. Guess what, 3 years later, it is still undeliverable.

A vote which cannot be delivered on, is undemocratic, one could argue?

I spent the first 25 years of my life living in Britain.

Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Hrolf The Ganger 02 Apr 19 3.02pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 That is so right, and of course manifesto promises are broken all the time, not that they are not meant but because government brings a new world of reality. It's very entertaining when a man as far left as you excuse away the corruption of the establishment when it suits your agenda. Shouldn't you be knocking down the door of Parliament in the name of revolution?

Hrolf The Ganger

02 Apr 19 3.02pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

That is so right, and of course manifesto promises are broken all the time, not that they are not meant but because government brings a new world of reality.

It's very entertaining when a man as far left as you excuse away the corruption of the establishment when it suits your agenda.

Shouldn't you be knocking down the door of Parliament in the name of revolution?

steeleye20 Croydon 02 Apr 19 3.07pm
Originally posted by Pussay Patrol Throwing facts at a brexiter is like throwing holy water on a vampire To think they would accept Mays deal is incredulous.

steeleye20

Croydon 02 Apr 19 3.07pm

Originally posted by Pussay Patrol

Throwing facts at a brexiter is like throwing holy water on a vampire

To think they would accept Mays deal is incredulous.

Rudi Hedman Caterham 02 Apr 19 3.34pm
Originally posted by Maine Eagle Business has a voice, that is the way of the world. Democracy is not what happened in 2016. An undeliverable vote happened in 2016. Guess what, 3 years later, it is still undeliverable. A vote which cannot be delivered on, is undemocratic, one could argue? I spent the first 25 years of my life living in Britain. It’s only undeliverable because mp’s choose not to deliver it. The referendum was a promise. It’s been broken. COYP

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 02 Apr 19 3.34pm

Originally posted by Maine Eagle

Business has a voice, that is the way of the world.

Democracy is not what happened in 2016. An undeliverable vote happened in 2016. Guess what, 3 years later, it is still undeliverable.

A vote which cannot be delivered on, is undemocratic, one could argue?

I spent the first 25 years of my life living in Britain.

It’s only undeliverable because mp’s choose not to deliver it.

The referendum was a promise. It’s been broken.

COYP

steeleye20 Croydon 02 Apr 19 3.37pm
MPs seek to stop no-deal Brexit by tabling article 50 bill. Labour’s Yvette Cooper to table bill aiming to ensure UK cannot exit EU with no deal by default Last ditch as we cannot rely on the PMs word, no deal was rejected by a distance a couple of weeks ago.

steeleye20

Croydon 02 Apr 19 3.37pm

MPs seek to stop no-deal Brexit by tabling article 50 bill.

Labour’s Yvette Cooper to table bill aiming to ensure UK cannot exit EU with no deal by default

Last ditch as we cannot rely on the PMs word, no deal was rejected by a distance a couple of weeks ago.

Hrolf The Ganger 02 Apr 19 3.42pm
Originally posted by steeleye20 MPs seek to stop no-deal Brexit by tabling article 50 bill. Labour’s Yvette Cooper to table bill aiming to ensure UK cannot exit EU with no deal by default Last ditch as we cannot rely on the PMs word, no deal was rejected by a distance a couple of weeks ago. Voting against democracy. new New Labour.

Hrolf The Ganger

02 Apr 19 3.42pm

Originally posted by steeleye20

MPs seek to stop no-deal Brexit by tabling article 50 bill.

Labour’s Yvette Cooper to table bill aiming to ensure UK cannot exit EU with no deal by default

Last ditch as we cannot rely on the PMs word, no deal was rejected by a distance a couple of weeks ago.

Voting against democracy.

new New Labour.

Hrolf The Ganger 02 Apr 19 3.51pm
Originally posted by Maine Eagle Business has a voice, that is the way of the world. Democracy is not what happened in 2016. An undeliverable vote happened in 2016. Guess what, 3 years later, it is still undeliverable. A vote which cannot be delivered on, is undemocratic, one could argue? I spent the first 25 years of my life living in Britain. You moved away from Britain but you want to tell all of us who are still here how our country should be run. Wonderful. I understand why you don't think it was democracy in 2016. It is because you lost. Business has a voice in the referendum by promoting Remain. It lost. The Labour Party had a chance to avoid a referendum by winning the last election. It lost. You could have elected Hillary Clinton in the last US election. She lost. Do you see a pattern here? 'The people' don't want your brand of politics.

Hrolf The Ganger

02 Apr 19 3.51pm

Originally posted by Maine Eagle

Business has a voice, that is the way of the world.

Democracy is not what happened in 2016. An undeliverable vote happened in 2016. Guess what, 3 years later, it is still undeliverable.

A vote which cannot be delivered on, is undemocratic, one could argue?

I spent the first 25 years of my life living in Britain.

You moved away from Britain but you want to tell all of us who are still here how our country should be run.

Wonderful.

I understand why you don't think it was democracy in 2016. It is because you lost.
Business has a voice in the referendum by promoting Remain. It lost.

The Labour Party had a chance to avoid a referendum by winning the last election. It lost.

You could have elected Hillary Clinton in the last US election. She lost.

Do you see a pattern here? 'The people' don't want your brand of politics.

steeleye20 Croydon 02 Apr 19 4.22pm
Fromage not Farage. My favourite brie cheese actually is tesco's finest from Cornwall. Just shows how patriotic remainers are.

steeleye20

Croydon 02 Apr 19 4.22pm

Fromage not Farage.

My favourite brie cheese actually is tesco's finest from Cornwall.

Just shows how patriotic remainers are.

Maine Eagle USA 02 Apr 19 4.34pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman It’s only undeliverable because mp’s choose not to deliver it. The referendum was a promise. It’s been broken. The big myth. MPs all have their own different versions of how to deliver it, and thus 3 years later there is no consensus. Why do they all have their own different versions? Because the vote in 2016 doesnt pick any of them. What a shocker. Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle

USA 02 Apr 19 4.34pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

It’s only undeliverable because mp’s choose not to deliver it.

The referendum was a promise. It’s been broken.

The big myth.

MPs all have their own different versions of how to deliver it, and thus 3 years later there is no consensus.

Why do they all have their own different versions? Because the vote in 2016 doesnt pick any of them.

What a shocker.

Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Midlands Eagle 02 Apr 19 4.37pm
Originally posted by Maine Eagle MPs all have their own different versions of how to deliver it, and thus 3 years later there is no consensus. Why do they all have their own different versions? Because the vote in 2016 doesnt pick any of them. What a shocker. I think that the main reasons why people voted to leave the EU were a mixture of getting rid of freedom of movement of people and becoming masters of our own destiny. How many of the many plans discussed incorporate those two aspects? Any of them?

Midlands Eagle

02 Apr 19 4.37pm

Originally posted by Maine Eagle

MPs all have their own different versions of how to deliver it, and thus 3 years later there is no consensus.

Why do they all have their own different versions? Because the vote in 2016 doesnt pick any of them.

What a shocker.

I think that the main reasons why people voted to leave the EU were a mixture of getting rid of freedom of movement of people and becoming masters of our own destiny.

How many of the many plans discussed incorporate those two aspects?

Any of them?

Maine Eagle USA 02 Apr 19 4.38pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger You moved away from Britain but you want to tell all of us who are still here how our country should be run. Wonderful. I understand why you don't think it was democracy in 2016. It is because you lost. Business has a voice in the referendum by promoting Remain. It lost. The Labour Party had a chance to avoid a referendum by winning the last election. It lost. You could have elected Hillary Clinton in the last US election. She lost. Do you see a pattern here? 'The people' don't want your brand of politics. Hillary won the popular vote. So the people did want my brand, sorry, you are completely and utterly wrong. Might want to read on how the electoral college works. She got more votes, so by definition, the people wanted her. I am no big fan of Hillary, dont get me wrong, but she got more votes mate. Anyway, Hrolf, I am just as British as you so my opinion counts just the same as yours. In fact it counts just the same as the residents of the inner city slums which you dont like, they are just as British as both of us, the ones born here/naturalized at least. I know your idea of a way forward is a totalitarian regime where people who dont agree with you are denied a vote, but that is how the khmer rouge works, not the UK parliament. Hrolf the supreme overlord has a nice ring to it, but this is a democracy not a dictatorship. Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle

USA 02 Apr 19 4.38pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

You moved away from Britain but you want to tell all of us who are still here how our country should be run.

Wonderful.

I understand why you don't think it was democracy in 2016. It is because you lost.
Business has a voice in the referendum by promoting Remain. It lost.

The Labour Party had a chance to avoid a referendum by winning the last election. It lost.

You could have elected Hillary Clinton in the last US election. She lost.

Do you see a pattern here? 'The people' don't want your brand of politics.

Hillary won the popular vote. So the people did want my brand, sorry, you are completely and utterly wrong.

Might want to read on how the electoral college works.

She got more votes, so by definition, the people wanted her. I am no big fan of Hillary, dont get me wrong, but she got more votes mate.

Anyway, Hrolf, I am just as British as you so my opinion counts just the same as yours. In fact it counts just the same as the residents of the inner city slums which you dont like, they are just as British as both of us, the ones born here/naturalized at least.

I know your idea of a way forward is a totalitarian regime where people who dont agree with you are denied a vote, but that is how the khmer rouge works, not the UK parliament.

Hrolf the supreme overlord has a nice ring to it, but this is a democracy not a dictatorship.

Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Hrolf The Ganger 02 Apr 19 4.40pm
Originally posted by Maine Eagle The big myth. MPs all have their own different versions of how to deliver it, and thus 3 years later there is no consensus. Why do they all have their own different versions? Because the vote in 2016 doesnt pick any of them. What a shocker. I guess it's easy to take this position when it doesn't affect you. Strange how you spend so much time promoting a second referendum in a country where you no longer live. Puzzling.

Hrolf The Ganger

02 Apr 19 4.40pm

Originally posted by Maine Eagle

The big myth.

MPs all have their own different versions of how to deliver it, and thus 3 years later there is no consensus.

Why do they all have their own different versions? Because the vote in 2016 doesnt pick any of them.

What a shocker.

I guess it's easy to take this position when it doesn't affect you. Strange how you spend so much time promoting a second referendum in a country where you no longer live.

Puzzling.

Maine Eagle USA 02 Apr 19 4.43pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger Voting against democracy. new New Labour. Yvette Cooper is simply trying to prevent the utter catastrophe of no deal. In her opinion (she is entitled to one) and as shared by MANY experts, no deal would be seriously bad f&cking news. She wont stand idly by while we slide unwillingly into a no deal crash out of the EU, which will definitely cost jobs and cause economic woes of epic proportions. I am sorry to point out but a large majority of business leaders including the head of the TUC and CBI, not to mention virtually every boss of a large multinational thinks no deal would be a monumental disaster for the country. That idiotic boss of Weatherspoons thinks its a great plan but I guess thats because recessions and mass job losses get people boozing more to drown their sorrows. Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Maine Eagle

USA 02 Apr 19 4.43pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Voting against democracy.

new New Labour.

Yvette Cooper is simply trying to prevent the utter catastrophe of no deal.

In her opinion (she is entitled to one) and as shared by MANY experts, no deal would be seriously bad f&cking news.

She wont stand idly by while we slide unwillingly into a no deal crash out of the EU, which will definitely cost jobs and cause economic woes of epic proportions.

I am sorry to point out but a large majority of business leaders including the head of the TUC and CBI, not to mention virtually every boss of a large multinational thinks no deal would be a monumental disaster for the country.

That idiotic boss of Weatherspoons thinks its a great plan but I guess thats because recessions and mass job losses get people boozing more to drown their sorrows.

Trump lost. Badly. Hahahahahahaha.

Page 969 of 1552 < 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 >

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)

Site Map