OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[BaaLocks]

And now Nigel Mirage, traumatised that he hasn't made the front page of the Mirror for at least ten days, decides to go for the headline grabber by suggesting we might just need a second referendum to kill off the argument for a generation.

Four things can happen as a result of this:

The result is conclusive to Brexit: everyone admits we got it right first time and the Remainers have their squib dampened

The result is a repeat of last time, minimal win to Brexit: we carry on as before, though with Remainers unable to lodge the 'we didn't know what we were voting for' argument

The result is a gentle swing to remain: Brexit is cancelled

The result is a significant swing to remain: Brexit is cancelled

Of all of those the option that would worry me most would be option three, where we move to a gentle majority for Brexit and I see some potential real social issues emerging if this is the case. We would need some sort of caveat in the wording of the vote to effectively suggest that the swing must be significant enough to warrant a change of direction.

Is this political spin from Mirage to do anything to get back in the limelight? Does he have a point? Do we care given we've probably already gone past the point of no return?

I'm inclined to agree with him actually, which is the strangest twist and turn of this ever more crazy political journey - six months ago I would have said there wasn't a statement that could come out of his lips that I could agree with. Ho hum, what did I know?

[ramAnag]

And now Nigel Mirage, traumatised that he hasn't made the front page of the Mirror for at least ten days, decides to go for the headline grabber by suggesting we might just need a second referendum to kill off the argument for a generation.

Four things can happen as a result of this:

The result is conclusive to Brexit: everyone admits we got it right first time and the Remainers have their squib dampened

The result is a repeat of last time, minimal win to Brexit: we carry on as before, though with Remainers unable to lodge the 'we didn't know what we were voting for' argument

The result is a gentle swing to remain: Brexit is cancelled

The result is a significant swing to remain: Brexit is cancelled

Of all of those the option that would worry me most would be option three, where we move to a gentle majority for Brexit and I see some potential real social issues emerging if this is the case. We would need some sort of caveat in the wording of the vote to effectively suggest that the swing must be significant enough to warrant a change of direction.

Is this political spin from Mirage to do anything to get back in the limelight? Does he have a point? Do we care given we've probably already gone past the point of no return?

I'm inclined to agree with him actually, which is the strangest twist and turn of this ever more crazy political journey - six months ago I would have said there wasn't a statement that could come out of his lips that I could agree with. Ho hum, what did I know?

Lol...you and me both Baalocks.
Maybe there’s a fifth way...those in power could recognise that the referendum was only ever ‘advisory’ and agree that, after wasting eighteen months on seeking a positive way through the Brexit maze, it’s best for all concerned if we just accept that it’s a ‘kin stupid self harming idea and we wish to proceed no further.
Can’t believe that Mr. Mirage (like that) would ever suggest anything that isn’t firmly rooted in self interest.

[Manofpride]

No one really thought that Brexit would win the vote and no one really thought Trump would be President but the votes went in and both got the results they wanted, they won the race and got their golden tickets! No one likes to lose but the fact is there are always winners and losers in life, accept the outcome and your defeat and get on board. The futures bright the futures Brexit!

[MadAmster]

Any 2nd referendum should not resemble the first.

1. In
2. Out
3. Stay in and push for a return to the free trade area instead of this stupid headlong rush to a US of E

Look at the Eastern EU Members. All refusing to take refugees from Africa and everybody else persuading theirs to come to us..... Too many countries are looking out for themselves to make a US of E a feasible entity

[ramAnag]

No one really thought that Brexit would win the vote and no one really thought Trump would be President but the votes went in and both got the results they wanted, they won the race and got their golden tickets! No one likes to lose but the fact is there are always winners and losers in life, accept the outcome and your defeat and get on board. The futures bright the futures Brexit!

Nice attempt to come full circle...except that...it almost certainly isn’t! There has been absolutely no evidence over the last eighteen months to support your claim. Stop running away...stay in, fight your corner and bring about the changes within the EU that I accept are needed.

[Ram59]

Lol...you and me both Baalocks.
Maybe there’s a fifth way...those in power could recognise that the referendum was only ever ‘advisory’ and agree that, after wasting eighteen months on seeking a positive way through the Brexit maze, it’s best for all concerned if we just accept that it’s a ‘kin stupid self harming idea and we wish to proceed no further.
Can’t believe that Mr. Mirage (like that) would ever suggest anything that isn’t firmly rooted in self interest.

The official government leaflet that was distributed stated that ' This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide'

That doesn't sound advisory to me!

[ramAnag]

The official government leaflet that was distributed stated that ' This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide'

That doesn't sound advisory to me!

Doesn’t sound as if the NHS is going to get £350m per week either, but...irony of ironies...the sovereignty of Parliament prevents any referendum from being anything other than advisory as, I believe, the High Court has established.

[Ram59]

Bizarrely, maybe if the great British public had been told that it was only 'advisory' then maybe the yes vote would have been higher. They may have seen it as an opportunity to give the EU a punch on the nose, but without committing to leave.

[MadAmster]

Bizarrely, maybe if the great British public had been told that it was only 'advisory' then maybe the yes vote would have been higher. They may have seen it as an opportunity to give the EU a punch on the nose, but without committing to leave.

Bizarre indeed. I knew pre the vote that it was advisory, I had heard Cameron say it on many an occasion and then add but I will implement the will......

If someone who has lived abroad since 1984 knew that then how on earth did the "great British public" not know?

My flabber has rarely, if ever, been so gasted.

[macstheman]

Because 99.9% couldn't care two frigging hoops at owt politicians say!!! Why?? Cause they are lying tossers!

[MadAmster]

Cameron told the truth though on this. Said it was advisory, which it was. Said he would abide by it and then resigned as he didn't like the OUT vote and it is, allegedly, being implemented.

Why allegedly? I still don't think it will happen.

Convinced they will come out with a statement that "circumstances have changed so drastically bla bla bla.... only right and proper..... 2nd referendum and these are the proper facts......"

[macstheman]

Of course it won't happen!! Everybody's pissed off with the bull**** so, as you say, it will be a case of 'oh, as no ****er knows what they are taking about we'll appoint a commission to review everything to report back in 25 years (or so)and then we'll look at it again!!'

[Manofpride]

We need Jacob Rees-Mogg to get more involved, would be a great replacement for May and he'd deliver the Brexit that the public voted for.

[MadAmster]

Here's one i posted on FB a few days ago.......

Have I understood this EU lark properly? It is basically run by the French for their own benefit. French farmers have been getting subsidies NOT to grow certain crops or rear certain animals. Others have had them as well but in very many cases the other farmers have been innovative and converted the use of their farmland to something of which there wasn't a lake/mountain. The French simply pull in all that lovely subsidy money for doing absolutely nothing and, quite likely, when a farmer dies and the farm passes on to his son, they continue to harvest subsidies for doing nothing. French fishermen aren't innovative either. They still use dragnets and butcher the sea floor. They also catch a lot of undersized fish and fish they shouldn't be. Those "unwanted" fish are thrown back into the sea.... dead! Dutch fishermen decided to look at alternatives. They came up with "pulse nets". They give out a small but harmless electric pulse that causes (no idea how it actually works) the "right" fish to jump off the sea bed and into the nets which are a metre or so above the sea bed. They catch very few undersized or "illegal to be caught" fish. They invested an awful lot of their own money, hundreds of thousands, to rig their boats out with this new technology. They no longer ruin the sea bed. The Dutch are willing to share their idea with the French fishermen. The French want none of it. Change? Not for us they say, pretty much the same as their farmers it seems. What did the French fishermen do? Instead of saying no they complained to the EU that the Dutch had an unfair advantage........ Pulse nets have now been made illegal by the EU taking much of the Dutch fleet out of service. The EU wants to stop the sea bed being ruined and less fish of the wrong sort/size being caught but the French have convinced MEPs that the very thing that stops what the EU wants stopping is unfair competition. Budget overspends. A 3% budget overspend invokes a fine. Several countries have been fined for the "offence". The French are perennial budget overspenders. They have never been fined. When asked why, Juncker's reply was "because they are the French". More on French farmers. Whenever something happens that they don't like they take to the main roads/motorways and block them. It's a protest they say. They then proceed to break open foreign trucks and steal the meat or vegetables in them. The French police just stand there and watch. The foreign drivers are down by whatever their cargo was worth........ The EU? Run for the French by the French.


I would like to add to the above that the Germans are brothers in arms with the French on this. As for the other countries, they say yes to everything but then ignore the bits they don't like. The Brits rock the boat by saying no to bits they don't like and not doing them but when they say yes, they go flat out to do whatever it is they agreed to.

[ramAnag]

Here's one i posted on FB a few days ago.......

Have I understood this EU lark properly? It is basically run by the French for their own benefit. French farmers have been getting subsidies NOT to grow certain crops or rear certain animals. Others have had them as well but in very many cases the other farmers have been innovative and converted the use of their farmland to something of which there wasn't a lake/mountain. The French simply pull in all that lovely subsidy money for doing absolutely nothing and, quite likely, when a farmer dies and the farm passes on to his son, they continue to harvest subsidies for doing nothing. French fishermen aren't innovative either. They still use dragnets and butcher the sea floor. They also catch a lot of undersized fish and fish they shouldn't be. Those "unwanted" fish are thrown back into the sea.... dead! Dutch fishermen decided to look at alternatives. They came up with "pulse nets". They give out a small but harmless electric pulse that causes (no idea how it actually works) the "right" fish to jump off the sea bed and into the nets which are a metre or so above the sea bed. They catch very few undersized or "illegal to be caught" fish. They invested an awful lot of their own money, hundreds of thousands, to rig their boats out with this new technology. They no longer ruin the sea bed. The Dutch are willing to share their idea with the French fishermen. The French want none of it. Change? Not for us they say, pretty much the same as their farmers it seems. What did the French fishermen do? Instead of saying no they complained to the EU that the Dutch had an unfair advantage........ Pulse nets have now been made illegal by the EU taking much of the Dutch fleet out of service. The EU wants to stop the sea bed being ruined and less fish of the wrong sort/size being caught but the French have convinced MEPs that the very thing that stops what the EU wants stopping is unfair competition. Budget overspends. A 3% budget overspend invokes a fine. Several countries have been fined for the "offence". The French are perennial budget overspenders. They have never been fined. When asked why, Juncker's reply was "because they are the French". More on French farmers. Whenever something happens that they don't like they take to the main roads/motorways and block them. It's a protest they say. They then proceed to break open foreign trucks and steal the meat or vegetables in them. The French police just stand there and watch. The foreign drivers are down by whatever their cargo was worth........ The EU? Run for the French by the French.


I would like to add to the above that the Germans are brothers in arms with the French on this. As for the other countries, they say yes to everything but then ignore the bits they don't like. The Brits rock the boat by saying no to bits they don't like and not doing them but when they say yes, they go flat out to do whatever it is they agreed to.

...and then they riot over the price of Nutella! In Seine!

But surely the way to sort out the things you speak of is to remain and show the reasonableness of our case rather than strop off.

MoP...first Mr. Mirage and now the well spoken anachronistic idiot Rees-Mogg. Now I know for sure you’re having a laugh. WUM