OT: Rejoiners

Many billions of Pounds, sorry, Euros, a year? The UK wasn't allowed to join (thanks, de Gaulle) until it was producing oil from the North Sea.

Once again your argument is lost as soon as you call Brexiter's racist. It's one of the reasons why I voted Brexit, simply because people like you called those promoting Leave racists.

Which is irrelevant in the same way if Remain won you call the possibility of another referendum "wouldn't matter".

You side-step the issue at hand and answer a different question. The truth hurts.

No, but if all parties say they will honour the result of a once in a lifetime referendum, it won't much for any party's integrity when the public are reminded of their policy just prior to 2016.

We're not talking of a government but all political parties. Going against the will of the people didn't go well for the LibDems.

Quite, the battle was won when we left the EU.

If Parliament got its act together we would now be in a state of BRINO. Corbyn saw that didn't happen.

Since EU leaders have said that the UK can rejoin, would be welcomed and assisted to rejoin because Brexit is clearly a disaster for their fellow Europeans in the UK this post is filed under JUNK.

It's just lies, plain untruth. But that has always been the way with Brexiters, they rarely say anything which is true. If you doubt it here is Jean Claude Junker in 2017:

Jean-Claude Juncker told reporters on Friday that he regretted Britain’s decision to leave but held out hope that it would return in the future. “I don’t like Brexit,” he said. “I would like to be in the same boat as the British. The day will come when the British re-enter the boat. I hope.”

A senior Juncker aide later said the option of Britain returning to the EU “will always be open”.

TW

TNP still an idiot I see. I didn't transfer my killfile to my new laptop. I will quickly put that right. There is no sense in wasting time with someone so foolish. TW

Polls are always paid for by somebody, and the results are likely to reflect that person's/organisation's preference. Pollsters are given a location or region and a quota of several types of person, initially judged by appearance and then by questioning.

The purpose, of course, is to poll a 'representative' sample of people, which requires foreknowledge of exactly what accurate representation means. Pollsters generally look for three of four demographics, and don't know what the quotas of other pollsters are, so the system is easily abused to tilt the result in a particular direction.

The purpose of opinion polls whose results are publicly revealed is to shape public opinion, not to measure it.

Never a truer word. From believing in authority a bit in my youth, I went to ignoring it completely in my middle years, and am now of the opinion that nothing is published, spoken, written and filmed without someone getting paid, and he who pays the piper calls the tune.

The one exception was in fact UKIP. No one was paying Nigel Farage (except the EU!)

I think that is why he was trusted.

I did not describe Brexiteers as racist, I said that racist elements in the population were drawn to vote for Leave by the refugee crisis. There were many reasons why people voted to leave, of which that was but one. However, to win, Leave needed all the votes, even those from the racists.

It was a how long is a piece of string question. It would depend upon there being a will to have another referendum and, after one experience of Brexit, if we rejoined I doubt there would be much appetite for another while this one is still in living memory.

The

The only truth is that Leave won through serendipity; a number of factors coming together at just the right time for them to win.

That will be eight years in the past when the next GE comes along. Nobody is going to care about what they said then if they are supporting what the public want today.

A Pyrrhic victory ISTM.

The short end of a rope? That sounds appropriate.

ITYM Boris.

So, no different to Labour then.

Of course it is possible. In fact, it would be a pre-requisite before any government could even approach the EU on the subject.

because it tales two to

You've made a poor choice of authority to appeal to:

"When it becomes serious, you have to lie"

Am 28/04/2023 um 10:16 schrieb Fredxx:

Of course Brexiteers are not racist. Racism is when you have a problem with black people. Since EU immigrants are predominantly white and Christian (although not the "good" kind of white or Christians), and since Brexiteers have a selective problem with EU immigrants, ergo they are not racist.

I rest my case, your Honour.

I suspect that cheese eating surrender monkeys voted to stay but there in no evidence for any of these speculative reason as to why people voted the way they did.

There are many who claim, and I agree, that it was John Major's and Tony Bliar's obsession with Europe and it's political expansion that made it morph into what it became and hence created the foundations for Brexit.

Where governments of the day could pass EU legislation in collusion with other EU governments that was never debated in Parliament but still enacted, because those were the rules those guilty parties above had signed up to.

Anything Cameron tried to do was too little and too late. He and the Commission and other EU governments were convinced they had appeased the UK electorate sufficiently to get a Remain majority.

Other than detailed studies, based upon post-referendum interviews, carried out by several academics.

I'm sure Dianne Abbot signed up for Remain, yet she will shortly be removed from the Labour party for her racist remarks. Remain just needed more racist votes to win.

My question was an observation of failed referendums, when the losing side generally wants another bite at the cherry, take the Scottish Nationalists Party who call for another independence referendum at every convenient occasion.

Hence my expectation you wouldn't support another Leave referendum if Remain won?

The arguments of the day won. What was believed, such as economic meltdown, or not swayed the vote.

My expectations is that we will become more intertwined with agreements with the EU as time goes on. Something people like TNP hates to see and already whingeing about, but I can see where common ground exists it will be embraced by all parties.

No, Brexit could have been very much watered down if there was a will for the fighting parties to have worked together.

I would hardly call membership of a single market or EFTA the short end of the rope. I genuinely wonder why you think it is?

Boris was a nobody after Cameron stepped down. Boris became PM because of Teresa May's ineptitude. Boris then won because Labour was unelectable, through Corbyn's political stance and Labour's policy of sitting on the fence re Brexit. Boris won by default and with the landslide majority turned from impotent to getting things done. Labour were utterly stupid in agreeing to a GE. Before the 2019 election Corbyn and Labour had the opportunity to enter a dialogue with Teresa May, but as we know that didn't happen, hence Boris. The rest is history.

My take was that there was and still is a huge wave of utter contempt for a rulking elite in Britain and in the EU that seemed and still have absolutely no interest in the concerns of the ordinary people.

The so called 'racist' element of that was summed up by one supporter

"If you want a **** for a neighbour, Vote liberal Democrat, Tory , or Labour".

But it wasn't just immigration. Energy was a big one. People hated bloody wind turbines planted round their houses, which ruined the view, and made their electricity more expensive at someone else's profit.

The EU was the first step to hit a blow back at those elites.

Then of course we realised that the Brexit was a fraud, and the Tories had no intention of implementing it if they could wriggle out of it, and more or less they have. The fundamental reality of Mays deal was to legally exit, but leave the EU in control via a legal treaty.

Boris, or rather Lord Frost, tried to build in let out clauses, but Sunak has destroyed those without a debate or any democratic input.

Whether in future a government will explore what is possible and really leave the EU is hard to say.

It is possible that the outcome of the Ukrainian/ Russia war will so modify the political landscape of Europe that the EU collapses.

It has been reported that every member of German CD party has been to Moscow and been 'entertained' by the Kremlin. The Greens have always been a Russian owned party. How far the EU itself was steered and controlled by the Kremlin is unclear, but they use the same methodology and have the same political stricture.

It wasn't without thought that the term 'EUSSR' was coined.

Putin's attempt to revive its namesake seems doomed. It may well take the EU down with it. You cannot totally repress a population without a police state, and as near as the wokeist movement and the Eurocrats have got to that, its not achieved the sort of political disappearances and relocations to the gulags that Putin has done. Of course the EU army will be used to discipline wayward member nations if it ever is formed.

Elections in Italy and Greece have basically been arranged by the EU, and France and the Netherlands are in turmoil against their EU inspired governments. The cost of living in Germany is out of control and the Poles are sick of the EU as well.

I am glad we are at least technically out.

More to the point, the British were largely a mix of Celts, Angles, Saxons and Scandinavians. We are pretty much the same race as Western Europeans. Britain was mostly empty at the end of the last ice age, and was colonised almost entirely by mainland Europeans.

But you are not keeping up with the times: now, 'racist' means pretty much the same as 'fascist' (small 'f') meant to the youth of the Sixties. It is just an all-purpose insult to anyone who says or does something the user dislikes.

Academics eh? Well it will all be total unadulterated wombat turds, then.

I met hundreds of the people who voted leave. I know what they voted that way. The 'academics' haven't a f****ng clue.

"What does 'male chauvinist pig mean'?" "It is something a woman calls a man when she isn't getting her own way"