Literally over half of the comments are from the same 2 people in this thread. Fat neckbeards trying to create the impression that Brexit was a good idea. So sad and pathetic if you really think about.
Literally over half of the comments are from the same 2 people in this thread. Fat neckbeards trying to create the impression that Brexit was a good idea. So sad and pathetic if you really think about.
Most voters think mostly of the short term implications of any policy. Obviously not all of them, but that short-term thinking has been so pervasive that it has become one of the biggest problems for politics over the years, at least in my opinion. That's why it is so hard to fix environmental issues or just any issue that requires short term sacrifice. While agree this is a problem, I would not say that is only present in remain voters. Very likely, a lot of exit voters believed that they would leave right away and solve all problems quickly. That's just how people tick sometimes.
I would agree however that likely, after enough time has passed, even an exiting Britain will do fine. Or at least I sincerely hope it does.
Given that millions of people voted on claims that were proven false, and even admitted as so by the very people who invented and spread those claims (after the vote of course), I wouldn't call it "fair". People were lied to and deliberately misled.
Besides, such an important referendum should have had such rules established beforehand anyway.
Last edited by Netherspark; 2016-09-11 at 04:39 PM.
But does anyone think the people in Brussel still want the UK to stay in now?
It was reported a while ago that the mood about the UK leaving was that of approval, because they never really were part of it anyway.
Ironically for those of us that want to stay in, leaving would actually make the EU more functional. Perfect example is the Chinese cheap steel that they flooded the EU market with. The EU wanted to put a tariff in place to protect EU steel production, but the UK vetoed that idea.
Which is ironic considering that cheap Chinese steel then destroyed the UK steel industry.
Best scenario will be if we stay in and lose the veto. That would actually improve the EU! No chance of selling that notion to the little Englanders that make up the Leave crowd though.
When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
Originally Posted by George CarlinOriginally Posted by Douglas Adams
Some countries sure want to have the UK still in the EU. Uk being conservative made the EU move slower so Brussels couldn't get certain changes through without long discussions, long enough for the public to get informed and get opinionated.
Free rolling EU with lots of fast changes might not be the best to benefit us.
Random foreigners keep saying Brexit isn't going to happen, yet their basis for saying so is...nothing, as far as I can tell.
"They haven't invoked Article 50 yet, that means they are never going to!"
"The Government indicated it would be invoked at the end of 2016/beginning of 2017."
"But...but...it is September already!!!!"
"Which is not...are you a retard?"
- - - Updated - - -
Germany and the other Free Trade nations certainly still don't want the UK to leave, as it swings the voting power away from the current balance toward the French Protectionist led bloc.
So Germany, Sweden, Holland, Ireland et al, we kinda fucked you up. Oops.
The government, or in fact the prime minister also said this:
"And for a Prime Minister to ignore the express will of the British people to leave the EU would not just be wrong, it would be undemocratic."
And then this:
"But the British people made a different decision to take a different path. As such I think the country requires fresh leadership to take it in this direction"
...
You are making claims that Brexit won't happen and that it will happen but won't be a real Brexit...in the same post. They are contradictory statements.
Something tells me you are making it up as you go along and don't know what you are talking about.
Also, I'm not entirely convinced you understand what 'Trojan Horse' means.
Okay...what's your point? Or do you just like quoting Cameron?
Cameron handed over the role of Prime Minister to someone who would invoke Article 50, he did not ignore the will of the people, he placed it in the hands of someone who would carry it out.
Of all the things Cameron has done in politics, that was the thing he has done which is beyond reproach from all sides.
Your posts don't contain 'nuance', they contain 'nonsense'. You literally don't have any grasp of British politics.
Who is the Trojan Horse in your scenario? And how are they being hijacked from within?And yes, 'Trojan Horse', because the deal with the EU will contain a lot of elements neither the Remain nor the Exit voters would be happy with.
The will of the people was to invoke article 50. Did he invoke it?
How can he not ignore the will of the people and at the same time hand it over to someone willing to carry it out? He could have carried out the will of the people, but ignored it instead and handed it over to someone else who just keeps repeating brexit means brexit.
It´s not unfounded that people have the idea that article 50 will not be triggered.