DavidDeSchmikes
Full Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2013
- Messages
- 17,998
Crush theLeaving the sheer lameness of the intro aside for a mo', it must've been a posh mate to have a garlic press about 35 years ago.
Crush theLeaving the sheer lameness of the intro aside for a mo', it must've been a posh mate to have a garlic press about 35 years ago.
Leaving the sheer lameness of the intro aside for a mo', it must've been a posh mate to have a garlic press about 35 years ago.
I can understand rejecting a second referendum on principle. You've also made arguments why Brexit is not a disaster. Given all that I'm curious why you voted remain, what was the logic behind it, and why you'd vote remain again?I've said before I voted remain and will do so again but I certainly do not think Brexit is a complete disaster like some others do
The other 16%?
Hmmm what could they be I wonder?
All UK governments have used the EU as their scapegoat when it suits them to distract from their own failures.
The EU is not perfect and has its faults but still have not seen what the main objections that have suddenly been imposed on the UK are.
The big topics are Freedom of movement, this has been there since day 1. ECJ the same. Laws are mainly trade laws or minimum standards and yet the UK are saying they're going to maintain EU laws and standards so this makes no sense either. Sovereignty, every country is sovereign and the contributions argument is so pedantic it is untrue plus the Uk have the best deal in the EU.
What has the EU deprived the UK of? Being able to do these imaginary famous trade deals.
I really cannot see how the UK will benefit in the slightest by leaving the EU.
I can understand rejecting a second referendum on principle. You've also made arguments why Brexit is not a disaster. Given all that I'm curious why you voted remain, what was the logic behind it, and why you'd vote remain again?
It clearly won't benefit, unless you think that every logical possible reason for why it won't benefit that's already been given is nonsense and that hypothetical and fantasy "maybe" scenarios are actually a possibility?Maybe the UK won't benefit, we know we will take a hit or two but maybe it will, until it's been tried we should honour the referendum.
No you wouldn't because there are loads of posters over the last three years in here just like you, who said they voted remain because they know 95% of posters in here are very pro-remain but then proceeded to spout nothing but support for leave and defend leave and criticize remain and the EU etc.
I've not argued it won't be a disaster because I don't know for sure but I do believe we are a big enough economy and a smart enough country to cope with whatever we do.
Last time: I voted remain because I work for a part of one of the biggest scientific companies in the world. The sector I work in (Agricultural research) conducts trials all over the world. I work very closely with colleagues in France, Spain, Germany, Italy, Romania, Poland, Greece, Italy and so on. I was concerned about what impact it would have on the UK branch of this company and still am. So far it has had no impact and there seems to be no mad panic at managment level but IF there was a second referendum, I would vote the same way.
So far it hasn't undermined client confidence but I do worry, of course I do.
The idea that a second referendum would somehow be any less "legitimate" than the first is just mind-bendingly stupid.
I think NI should have the ultimate say in their relationship with the UK and the EU. They voted to remain but also didn't vote to leave the UK either. Realistically I think if the NI population had the options of full EU membership as a fully independent country outside of the UK, quasi-alignment as per the current agreement on the table or full UK membership with a hard border with ROI... I imagine they'd probably opt for the agreement on the table.
I have asked you so many times today to give some concrete facts and back up your "points" and you just keep ignoring the question
Can we assume that if you were employed by a British Company then, one that solely operated in Britain for arguements sake, that you then would have voted Leave?
that's like asking what the point of a Utd forum is if 95% of the members support them.Regardless of my own position on Brexit, I do wonder what the actual point of this discussion thread is given the advocacy/bias emphasis you mention.
Because you said earlier that you know people who voted to Leave who had made a lot of good points as to why they did so, but you haven't been able to give me any of those points. So.. did they make good points or what?Why would you think I had any concrete facts on why it would benefit us to leave? If I had then I would have voted Leave. I voted remain. You may not believe that but it's true.
Every possible weapon in the parliamentary book is being deployed including recourse to the supreme court.
yes I think once the cat is out of the bag so to speak its going to be hard to get it back in there...My worry is these weapons will now become our way of politics.
yes I think once the cat is out of the bag so to speak its going to be hard to get it back in there...
its a shame and I hope we dont end up with a so clearly politicized supreme court as they have in America
agreed - though in the short term I dont see it changingThe more politicians take things to the Supreme court the more likelihood that it becomes politicised. It is a dangerous precedent.
that's like asking what the point of a Utd forum is if 95% of the members support them.
They will. It will come in the Border Poll legislated for in the GFA. But it wont be a choice to go as an Independent Country but to reunite with the ROI and therefore remain in the EU.
Because you said earlier that you know people who voted to Leave who had made a lot of good points as to why they did so, but you haven't been able to give me any of those points. So.. did they make good points or what?
What kind of pub is it?
I don’t doubt anything you say above, it’s just in your original post you stated ‘civil war or worst’ and I was trying to ascertain what you meant by that.Nobody wants any of that. I am saying that vote has to be honoured else why would any vote will ever be honoured again. Why should a 2nd ref with a majority to remain be honoured? Was the 2016 referendum illegal? Can that be shown? Sure a lot of lies were told. But are lies not told in every election there has ever been? Fundamentally there were problems in this country that Cameron either did not understand or underestimated. If we are a democracy and referendums are going to be used to settle issues then they need to be honoured. Even if it is painful. If it is that painful, have another one to reverse it. But having a 2nd before the first is enacted will have the effect of rendering it meaningless.
Err...no it isn't.
Because you said earlier that you know people who voted to Leave who had made a lot of good points as to why they did so, but you haven't been able to give me any of those points. So.. did they make good points or what?
NI within the UK with a hard border,
I mean, it definitely is. Here's another one..Err...no it isn't.
This has been the entire sticking point of Brexit. Its a complete non runner.
The fact that BrExit is proving so hard to deliver tells me it’s the wrong thing to do. If it truly was ‘the will of the people’ it would have been so much easier to get across the line.
They're all terrible points though, and outright untrue in most cases. Do you personally think they're good points, as you said earlier?Those are their main points and I imagine the main points for most Leave voters. It may only be 4 points and to you they may not seem good, otherwise you'd have voted leave but all four of those points are huge constitutional items that Leave voters see as something they don't like.
- They are all keen on political and financial independence
- None like the level of bureaucracy that comes with the EU
- They are all keen to avoid being taken into further political and fiscal integration - on this point I can see the appeal.
- They want to break free from the jurisdiction of the ECJ - this isn't something I see as particularly important
They're all terrible points though, and outright untrue in most cases. Do you personally think they're good points, as you said earlier?
Those are their main points and I imagine the main points for most Leave voters. It may only be 4 points and to you they may not seem good, otherwise you'd have voted leave but all four of those points are huge constitutional items that Leave voters see as something they don't like.
- They are all keen on political and financial independence
- None like the level of bureaucracy that comes with the EU
- They are all keen to avoid being taken into further political and fiscal integration - on this point I can see the appeal.
- They want to break free from the jurisdiction of the ECJ - this isn't something I see as particularly important
Just because they're not terrible to those who voted for them doesn't make them not terrible, unless you think any opinion anyone has ever had for doing something is valid because it's their opinion?But they're not terrible to those that voted for them Massive Spanner, that's why they voted for them and how do you see they're untrue?