The Consequences of Brexit [Part 6] READ FIRST POST BEFORE COMMENTING

[Mister M 1,627]

10 minutes ago, apelike said:

It still did not stop him from being very patronising though by stating, "They voted by a small majority to leave the union, but they had no idea what leaving the union meant." 

 

But that's true.

I'm sure lots of people have listened to radio and television phone ins over the last couple of years. And I'm sure that you'll have heard many Brexiteers say things that make Philomena Cunk sound like a genius. 

It's not patronising, it's true. I suppose that could be true of some remainers.

 

Edited January 14, 2019 by Mister M

[Magilla 510]

3 hours ago, Mister M said:

The last point you raised is an interesting one, as we were talking about it at work today. The consensus of opinion was that people voted to remain as it felt less risky than to vote leave

Really, nothing to do with the obvious economic advantages & rights people get as members?

 

2 hours ago, ez8004 said:

You still think a no deal is possible?  How very naive you are. 

The LEAVEalliance's view of dropping to WTO:

http://leavehq.com/values.aspx

One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government should allow it. The option should be rejected.

 

This is a pro-Brexit think tank!

 

12 minutes ago, Mister M said:

But that's true.

 

Absolutely, as is clear from reading the many posts on this thread.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

7 minutes ago, Mister M said:

But I suppose that could be true of some remainers.

I'd say that most remainers simply thought that the UK was much better off as part of the EU but I doubt that many would have realised how disastrous leaving would be.

[Mister M 1,627]

4 minutes ago, Magilla said:

Really, nothing to do with the obvious economic advantages & rights people get as members?

 

The LEAVEalliance's view of dropping to WTO:

http://leavehq.com/values.aspx

One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government should allow it. The option should be rejected.

 

This is a pro-Brexit think tank!

 

I didn't say it was.

[Longcol 610]

2 hours ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

We should have had a Brexiteer doing the deals, it's just common sense. We should have told the EU in no uncertain terms what WE wanted from them, and negotiated from that position of strength.

Wasn't that David Davis' job? He was as handy as a crack in a glass eye.

 

Telling someone ten times as big as you who holds all the aces what you want from them is not negotiating from a position of strength - it's called madness.

[woodview 10]

32 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Half the electorate?

 

Less than 40% of the electorate voted for Brexit so sacking it off altogeter is actually really respecting the wishes of the electorate.

Even less voted to be in the eu though didn't they.

[Magilla 510]

13 minutes ago, Mister M said:

I didn't say it was.

I just think it's a weird "concensus", doesn't bare any relation to any views of any remainers I know.

 

 

Edited January 14, 2019 by Magilla

[apelike 10]

12 minutes ago, Mister M said:

It's not patronising, it's true. I suppose that could be true of some remainers.

The only bit that is true is that it was a small majority as the rest he cant back up and is just another remainer sound bite.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

1 minute ago, woodview said:

Even less voted to be in the eu though didn't they.

That is completely irrelevant.

 

We have been in the EU for decades. We don't leave simply because 36.7% of the electorate want us to. We don't need a second referendum, just a government with the stones to put the interests of the country first!

[woodview 10]

4 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

That is completely irrelevant.

 

We have been in the EU for decades. We don't leave simply because 36.7% of the electorate want us to. We don't need a second referendum, just a government with the stones to put the interests of the country first!

Following the choice of the minority is irrelevant? You have a different view of the world to most people, luckily.

[RJRB 688]

1 hour ago, tinfoilhat said:

Jeremy corbyn anyone? Proven brexiteer based on his previous voting pattern, more so than Boris. 

Somehow I just do not see Jeremy as the tough negotiator that is required.

I really do not get that a General Election does anything to advance Brexit ,although there are many other issues that do need addressing whoever might win.

These will continue to be secondary until some deal is sorted,and this seems  as distant as ever.

Go for a People’s Vote Jeremy and stop pretending that you have a new improved deal that will have a majority backing or is agreed by the EU 27.

[Mister M 1,627]

15 minutes ago, Magilla said:

I just think it's weird that that didn't seem to figure in the debate. I'm not sure "less risky" is appropriate... but hey, each to their own.

 

It was only a quick discussion at work. Colleagues were talking about the people they knew who had voted to leave, and immigration was the key reason cited as a reason for leaving. 

I think the reason that some colleagues felt it was risky is because the UK has been a member for nearly 50 years, and taking a leap into the unknown, when we didn't even know what was to be negotiated felt risky.

Edited January 14, 2019 by Mister M