Brexit

Ok Thanks @Dennis, Or to save all that just post in a darker colour

 

It happens the other way too when people on the light theme post in a different colour to the default.

 

Are you seriously trying to argue that all leave voters voted for a hard brexit? The simply fact that some leave groups were even talking about things like Norway+ before the vote disagrees with that.

And I'm not even sure another vote now makes sense. May's deal is one done without a focus so it's not a valid option for anyone. The second vote needed done much sooner before negotiations started

 

Now the remainers have taken the only bargaining tool away from May's negotiations, well done Cooper, you may find you don't have a constituency to stand in the near future, back stabbed your electorate who voted overwhelmingly to leave.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/apr/08/brexit-latest-news-live-theresa-may-union-most-likely-outcome-if-labour-and-government-can-compromise-says-minister-live-news

I'm seriously arguing the people who I speak to who vote leave voted for us to get out of the EU single market and the customs union now if that's what you call hard brexit yes I am, David Cameron actually said at the time a vote to leave would mean leaving the EU and the Customs Union.
And Cooper & Letwin doing what they did makes getting out whilst May is trying to negotiate the back stop more difficult with (both arms tied behind her back), but we'll forget about that because that's they way you remainers like it.

 

To go after the undecided voters though when Cameron said things like it means leaving the EU and the Customs Union parts of the remain campaign would start floating things like saying Norway+ were an option under a leave vote. So you may be speaking to people who were after a hard brexit but there is a sizeable amount that voted more on softer option. What that split is though no-one knows and its where the problem lies

 

We were given 2 options, Leave or remain which leave won, They were not offered different leave options nor sought them, The truth of the matter is that the remain side have invented and promoted softer brexit options to try divide the leave vote with the intention of eventually overturning it or watering it down to an extent it is in fact a remain or stand still situation,
BTW it is laughable that MPs are claiming that parliament have taken over the process from the government as what has really happened is that they have taken every bargaining option away and have given the UKs power over brexit to the EU who will now take all decisions on what we can have on brexit.
These MPs should never ever sit on behalf of the people again

 

Your missing the point, if Parliment sign up to this deal as it is there is no guarantee we won't be lock into it permanently.
I think that is a major concern for the likes of the ERG.
People say we can sign up and change things from inside, I believe if we sign up for the present deal we have no say in anything put forward by any of the other 27 countries (which I can understand) but as we are still in the customs union we still pay our share of things we have no control over.
Would any other Sovereign country allow laws or decisions be made on their behalf without any input.
If she could get the wording of the back stop changed so once the hard/soft border has been sorted the UK is allowed to leave.
Strange that a comment from the EU negotiators was if we leave with no deal the EU would not have a hard border between Northern and Southern Ireland, so the question has to be asked if the EU wouldn't have a hard border why is it such a big deal for the UK to have one.

 

I must have missed that deal, the only deal on the table is the EU deal with a backtop, and Ive given the reasons I believe the likes of Rees-Mogg and Johnson are against it and won't vote for it.

 

This is the best thing I've read about Brexit for ages. It's quite a long read but well worth it. It's written by an ardent Brexiteer who has changed his mind.
It explains why most of the arguments for Brexit are fallacies.
Also points out @Bronco that the Leave campaign went out of their way to convince the millions of undecided voters (ie not committed Brexiteers) that the process would be simple and seamless and that we could have our cake and eat it. Millions voted for Brexit on that basis, not for a No Deal Brexit based on WTO terms.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/i-was-strong-brexiteer-now-we-must-swallow-our-pride-and-think-again/

 

Genuine question to you regardless of what journo thinks, if we have a referendum and leave wins again what then?

 

The same Peter Osborne who wrote this artical for the Daily Mail, I find it a little strange that a man of his understanding would get his original support of Brexit so wrong, was he also taken in by the lies the leavers told .

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6892599/PETER-OBORNE-backed-soft-Brexiters-patriotic-duty-Britain-together.html
As this situation is unprecedented once again it is far from clear either side just how bad the divorce will be to leave and trade on WTO terms.
Just change the wording of the back stop to we decide when we leave and we sign up easy, I posted similar when may brought the deal back originally, no MP would sign up to the back stop in its present situation.

 

Seems every article written is against brexit and the right, Explores all kinds of issues with Trump and the Leave campaign but little about Remain, Take with a pinch of salt, There are many articles funded by those who would try and defeat the will of the people, The Irish and others in the EU had the same thing when voting against EU proposals, Thing is they usually achieve it.

 

How many times do you want it testing? Till your side wins?, That is usually the EU way of democracy and £millions are been spent changing the public's view, George Soros would be delighted his millions are having an effect