comment by Cinciwolf--Whiney and easily offended! (U11551)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Der Post Nearly Mann. Rangnificent (U1270)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 9 minutes ago
Then they got hoodwinked into voting to leave.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My issue is that even now people can't explain the economic platform they voted for. On one side it was just vague soundbites about the NHS and no explanation of any implementation strategy, and on the other there was no organised messaging to debunk it. In the end it I don't think the economy played any part in the Leave vote, which is why now, faced with the inevitable questioning of whether they're seeing the benefits they were promised people start scratching their heads. They had no idea what economic benefits they were being promised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but them indians and muslims and that, they are eu right? Taking our jobs......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'Lets get all the Poles to come and do the Sheite jobs while we send our kids to Universities to get worthless degrees'. Blaire
I've always quite fancied living in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
The trains and wine are better, and you don't hear about are soverenty as much.
I see the Eastern European immigration position is making a belated bow.
Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the elephant in the room....
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf--Whiney and easily offended! (U11551)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Der Post Nearly Mann. Rangnificent (U1270)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 9 minutes ago
Then they got hoodwinked into voting to leave.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My issue is that even now people can't explain the economic platform they voted for. On one side it was just vague soundbites about the NHS and no explanation of any implementation strategy, and on the other there was no organised messaging to debunk it. In the end it I don't think the economy played any part in the Leave vote, which is why now, faced with the inevitable questioning of whether they're seeing the benefits they were promised people start scratching their heads. They had no idea what economic benefits they were being promised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but them indians and muslims and that, they are eu right? Taking our jobs......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'Lets get all the Poles to come and do the Sheite jobs while we send our kids to Universities to get worthless degrees'. Blaire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here comes the xenophobia. A late appearance by its usual standards on this subject.
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by Cinciwolf--Whiney and easily offended! (U11551)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Der Post Nearly Mann. Rangnificent (U1270)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 9 minutes ago
Then they got hoodwinked into voting to leave.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My issue is that even now people can't explain the economic platform they voted for. On one side it was just vague soundbites about the NHS and no explanation of any implementation strategy, and on the other there was no organised messaging to debunk it. In the end it I don't think the economy played any part in the Leave vote, which is why now, faced with the inevitable questioning of whether they're seeing the benefits they were promised people start scratching their heads. They had no idea what economic benefits they were being promised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but them indians and muslims and that, they are eu right? Taking our jobs......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'Lets get all the Poles to come and do the Sheite jobs while we send our kids to Universities to get worthless degrees'. Blaire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, another widely held misconception. It was actually the EU expansion scheme in 2004 that resulted in Poles etc being able to come to the UK. Not Tony Blair.
https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-history/history-eu/2000-09_en
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 17 minutes ago
“ Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.”
See what happens when you give too much credence to the ramblings of Farage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You see that's one huge mistake right there - assuming that "Remainers" are "Rejoiners".
For me I'd need to see what the case for rejoining was. I doubt we'd get back in with the same terms that we had last time and threw away with the Brexit vote.
For example: the scenario you describe would never have happened with the British veto that Margaret Thatcher went out on a limb to ensure we retained.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
It makes most sense, and why many countries needing a big majority to make such big decisions. Making decisions of this gravity on such a marginal basis is reeetarded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost as reeeetarded as joining without a vote in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We joined following a general election where the winner campaigned on it. You already know that though, as you responded to a post on it. You're just following the natural Brexiter state of repeating falsehoods regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I already said, we joined a common market. Not what the EU ended up being. A big difference and the reason why a lot of the older voters voted for Brexit. Because they didn't forget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were referendums on whether to leave in the 70s. The Labour Party campaigned kn leaving the EEC in the 80s. After the Maaschrict Treaty was signed in the 90s, a political party campaigned every election on leaving or providing a referendum.
You had plenty of chances to vote against it. You just likely didn't care until you were told to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those elections were not one policy campaigns, unlike 2019, many people would have been more focused on other policies, and once Blair was in charge the slide began.
Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.
And here is a benefit of leaving, Freeports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should have also added this has been debunked (Federal State) more times than I can remember. As each member state has an executive veto over treaty change. One of the reasons why the EU has been historically so slow (as had 28 countries all to agree).
And again the EU political system is (PR) considerably more democratic that the UK's (FPTP). And without wishing to state the obvious, political representation is not "unelected"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The commission is unelected and we know that they are the driving force.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
Post, the pandemic also exposed the lies about the UK and its borders as well.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by Cinciwolf--Whiney and easily offended! (U11551)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Der Post Nearly Mann. Rangnificent (U1270)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 9 minutes ago
Then they got hoodwinked into voting to leave.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My issue is that even now people can't explain the economic platform they voted for. On one side it was just vague soundbites about the NHS and no explanation of any implementation strategy, and on the other there was no organised messaging to debunk it. In the end it I don't think the economy played any part in the Leave vote, which is why now, faced with the inevitable questioning of whether they're seeing the benefits they were promised people start scratching their heads. They had no idea what economic benefits they were being promised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but them indians and muslims and that, they are eu right? Taking our jobs......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'Lets get all the Poles to come and do the Sheite jobs while we send our kids to Universities to get worthless degrees'. Blaire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, another widely held misconception. It was actually the EU expansion scheme in 2004 that resulted in Poles etc being able to come to the UK. Not Tony Blair.
https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-history/history-eu/2000-09_en
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Knew that Stuart, but was sarcastically replying to the racist comment. Again I have no problem with immigration that was not a factor in my decision.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
———
We’ve almost got a full-house.
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 17 minutes ago
“ Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.”
See what happens when you give too much credence to the ramblings of Farage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You see that's one huge mistake right there - assuming that "Remainers" are "Rejoiners".
For me I'd need to see what the case for rejoining was. I doubt we'd get back in with the same terms that we had last time and threw away with the Brexit vote.
For example: the scenario you describe would never have happened with the British veto that Margaret Thatcher went out on a limb to ensure we retained.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same here. I'd have to see the terms of rejoining. Given our position is now much weaker, I imagine the terms would be much worse.
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
It makes most sense, and why many countries needing a big majority to make such big decisions. Making decisions of this gravity on such a marginal basis is reeetarded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost as reeeetarded as joining without a vote in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We joined following a general election where the winner campaigned on it. You already know that though, as you responded to a post on it. You're just following the natural Brexiter state of repeating falsehoods regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I already said, we joined a common market. Not what the EU ended up being. A big difference and the reason why a lot of the older voters voted for Brexit. Because they didn't forget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were referendums on whether to leave in the 70s. The Labour Party campaigned kn leaving the EEC in the 80s. After the Maaschrict Treaty was signed in the 90s, a political party campaigned every election on leaving or providing a referendum.
You had plenty of chances to vote against it. You just likely didn't care until you were told to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those elections were not one policy campaigns, unlike 2019, many people would have been more focused on other policies, and once Blair was in charge the slide began.
Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.
And here is a benefit of leaving, Freeports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should have also added this has been debunked (Federal State) more times than I can remember. As each member state has an executive veto over treaty change. One of the reasons why the EU has been historically so slow (as had 28 countries all to agree).
And again the EU political system is (PR) considerably more democratic that the UK's (FPTP). And without wishing to state the obvious, political representation is not "unelected"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The commission is unelected and we know that they are the driving force.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cameron was a committed European who cocked up. He desperately needed concessions to head off a referendum. The people driving the vote (with the vested interests) had little interest in any concessions he managed to get agreement to.
The terms would be worse than we had, but still better than not being in the EU, I suspect.
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
It makes most sense, and why many countries needing a big majority to make such big decisions. Making decisions of this gravity on such a marginal basis is reeetarded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost as reeeetarded as joining without a vote in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We joined following a general election where the winner campaigned on it. You already know that though, as you responded to a post on it. You're just following the natural Brexiter state of repeating falsehoods regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I already said, we joined a common market. Not what the EU ended up being. A big difference and the reason why a lot of the older voters voted for Brexit. Because they didn't forget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were referendums on whether to leave in the 70s. The Labour Party campaigned kn leaving the EEC in the 80s. After the Maaschrict Treaty was signed in the 90s, a political party campaigned every election on leaving or providing a referendum.
You had plenty of chances to vote against it. You just likely didn't care until you were told to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those elections were not one policy campaigns, unlike 2019, many people would have been more focused on other policies, and once Blair was in charge the slide began.
Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.
And here is a benefit of leaving, Freeports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should have also added this has been debunked (Federal State) more times than I can remember. As each member state has an executive veto over treaty change. One of the reasons why the EU has been historically so slow (as had 28 countries all to agree).
And again the EU political system is (PR) considerably more democratic that the UK's (FPTP). And without wishing to state the obvious, political representation is not "unelected"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The commission is unelected and we know that they are the driving force.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again not true.
https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/leadership/elections-and-appointments_en
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/8/how-are-the-commission-president-and-commissioners-appointed
The boots on the ground (like our own civil servants) are not elected. Nor would one expect them to be. Unless you feel that the UK should hold elections to appoint it's (nearly 500,000 strong) civil servants??
In regard to Cameron, he got considerably more than any other member state had ever been afforded. Ensuring the UK had more 'opt outs' than any other EU country.
Please see:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105
Not being funny but nearly everything you've posted has been inaccurate, or false.
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
Post, the pandemic also exposed the lies about the UK and its borders as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course. It was a mess from top to bottom, and I find the desperate post-rationalisation depressing. Very few people who voted leave are willing to explain their motives either. Like I said, they can't have been economic.
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 2 minutes ago
The terms would be worse than we had, but still better than not being in the EU, I suspect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who knows. If I were the EU, I'd try to rinse us now if we rejoined. Our negotiators have already demonstrated their utter incompetence.
Because many of them fear being called xenophobic and, or, racist because they voted due to foreigners.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 17 minutes ago
“ Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.”
See what happens when you give too much credence to the ramblings of Farage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You see that's one huge mistake right there - assuming that "Remainers" are "Rejoiners".
For me I'd need to see what the case for rejoining was. I doubt we'd get back in with the same terms that we had last time and threw away with the Brexit vote.
For example: the scenario you describe would never have happened with the British veto that Margaret Thatcher went out on a limb to ensure we retained.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same here. I'd have to see the terms of rejoining. Given our position is now much weaker, I imagine the terms would be much worse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They never wanted us to leave, they would bite our hands off to get our money.
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 17 minutes ago
“ Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.”
See what happens when you give too much credence to the ramblings of Farage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You see that's one huge mistake right there - assuming that "Remainers" are "Rejoiners".
For me I'd need to see what the case for rejoining was. I doubt we'd get back in with the same terms that we had last time and threw away with the Brexit vote.
For example: the scenario you describe would never have happened with the British veto that Margaret Thatcher went out on a limb to ensure we retained.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same here. I'd have to see the terms of rejoining. Given our position is now much weaker, I imagine the terms would be much worse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They never wanted us to leave, they would bite our hands off to get our money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They need us more than we need them, right?
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 2 minutes ago
The terms would be worse than we had, but still better than not being in the EU, I suspect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who knows. If I were the EU, I'd try to rinse us now if we rejoined. Our negotiators have already demonstrated their utter incompetence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Would still be better than what we’ll get from outside the EU, though.
Plus our negotiators won’t be the same people anyway, it’d have to be a completely different government that would think about rejoining.
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 4 minutes ago
Because many of them fear being called xenophobic and, or, racist because they voted due to foreigners.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the smarter ones are starting to realise they've been had.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
It makes most sense, and why many countries needing a big majority to make such big decisions. Making decisions of this gravity on such a marginal basis is reeetarded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost as reeeetarded as joining without a vote in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We joined following a general election where the winner campaigned on it. You already know that though, as you responded to a post on it. You're just following the natural Brexiter state of repeating falsehoods regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I already said, we joined a common market. Not what the EU ended up being. A big difference and the reason why a lot of the older voters voted for Brexit. Because they didn't forget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were referendums on whether to leave in the 70s. The Labour Party campaigned kn leaving the EEC in the 80s. After the Maaschrict Treaty was signed in the 90s, a political party campaigned every election on leaving or providing a referendum.
You had plenty of chances to vote against it. You just likely didn't care until you were told to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those elections were not one policy campaigns, unlike 2019, many people would have been more focused on other policies, and once Blair was in charge the slide began.
Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.
And here is a benefit of leaving, Freeports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should have also added this has been debunked (Federal State) more times than I can remember. As each member state has an executive veto over treaty change. One of the reasons why the EU has been historically so slow (as had 28 countries all to agree).
And again the EU political system is (PR) considerably more democratic that the UK's (FPTP). And without wishing to state the obvious, political representation is not "unelected"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The commission is unelected and we know that they are the driving force.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again not true.
https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/leadership/elections-and-appointments_en
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/8/how-are-the-commission-president-and-commissioners-appointed
The boots on the ground (like our own civil servants) are not elected. Nor would one expect them to be. Unless you feel that the UK should hold elections to appoint it's (nearly 500,000 strong) civil servants??
In regard to Cameron, he got considerably more than any other member state had ever been afforded. Ensuring the UK had more 'opt outs' than any other EU country.
Please see:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105
Not being funny but nearly everything you've posted has been inaccurate, or false.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe, I can see that arguing facts is a no win with you.
But this is not an argument won or lost on facts, it is about feelings and emotions and that is probably why we voted to leave, not political institutions or cost return benefits.
Wishing you all a Merry Xmas and Happy New Year.
Got to start cooking dinner.
There are rules of accession - the UK would need to agree to accept baseline EU standards. At present the UK would not meet many of these, as it has rejected them to accomodate FTAs with the Aussiess/US etc.
https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/enlargement-policy/glossary/accession-eu_en#:~:text=European%20Commission%20%2D%20Enlargement%20%2D%20Accession%20to%20the%20EU&text=A%20state%20that%20wishes%20to,and%20undertake%20to%20promote%20them.
That's not to say under a different government the UK may have a change of tact in the future. Just can't see it any time soon.
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
It makes most sense, and why many countries needing a big majority to make such big decisions. Making decisions of this gravity on such a marginal basis is reeetarded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost as reeeetarded as joining without a vote in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We joined following a general election where the winner campaigned on it. You already know that though, as you responded to a post on it. You're just following the natural Brexiter state of repeating falsehoods regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I already said, we joined a common market. Not what the EU ended up being. A big difference and the reason why a lot of the older voters voted for Brexit. Because they didn't forget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were referendums on whether to leave in the 70s. The Labour Party campaigned kn leaving the EEC in the 80s. After the Maaschrict Treaty was signed in the 90s, a political party campaigned every election on leaving or providing a referendum.
You had plenty of chances to vote against it. You just likely didn't care until you were told to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those elections were not one policy campaigns, unlike 2019, many people would have been more focused on other policies, and once Blair was in charge the slide began.
Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.
And here is a benefit of leaving, Freeports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should have also added this has been debunked (Federal State) more times than I can remember. As each member state has an executive veto over treaty change. One of the reasons why the EU has been historically so slow (as had 28 countries all to agree).
And again the EU political system is (PR) considerably more democratic that the UK's (FPTP). And without wishing to state the obvious, political representation is not "unelected"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The commission is unelected and we know that they are the driving force.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again not true.
https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/leadership/elections-and-appointments_en
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/8/how-are-the-commission-president-and-commissioners-appointed
The boots on the ground (like our own civil servants) are not elected. Nor would one expect them to be. Unless you feel that the UK should hold elections to appoint it's (nearly 500,000 strong) civil servants??
In regard to Cameron, he got considerably more than any other member state had ever been afforded. Ensuring the UK had more 'opt outs' than any other EU country.
Please see:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105
Not being funny but nearly everything you've posted has been inaccurate, or false.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe, I can see that arguing facts is a no win with you.
But this is not an argument won or lost on facts, it is about feelings and emotions and that is probably why we voted to leave, not political institutions or cost return benefits.
Wishing you all a Merry Xmas and Happy New Year.
Got to start cooking dinner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You too
Sign in if you want to comment
Brexit
Page 15 of 21
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20
posted on 21/12/21
comment by Cinciwolf--Whiney and easily offended! (U11551)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Der Post Nearly Mann. Rangnificent (U1270)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 9 minutes ago
Then they got hoodwinked into voting to leave.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My issue is that even now people can't explain the economic platform they voted for. On one side it was just vague soundbites about the NHS and no explanation of any implementation strategy, and on the other there was no organised messaging to debunk it. In the end it I don't think the economy played any part in the Leave vote, which is why now, faced with the inevitable questioning of whether they're seeing the benefits they were promised people start scratching their heads. They had no idea what economic benefits they were being promised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but them indians and muslims and that, they are eu right? Taking our jobs......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'Lets get all the Poles to come and do the Sheite jobs while we send our kids to Universities to get worthless degrees'. Blaire
posted on 21/12/21
I've always quite fancied living in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
The trains and wine are better, and you don't hear about are soverenty as much.
posted on 21/12/21
I see the Eastern European immigration position is making a belated bow.
Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the elephant in the room....
posted on 21/12/21
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf--Whiney and easily offended! (U11551)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Der Post Nearly Mann. Rangnificent (U1270)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 9 minutes ago
Then they got hoodwinked into voting to leave.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My issue is that even now people can't explain the economic platform they voted for. On one side it was just vague soundbites about the NHS and no explanation of any implementation strategy, and on the other there was no organised messaging to debunk it. In the end it I don't think the economy played any part in the Leave vote, which is why now, faced with the inevitable questioning of whether they're seeing the benefits they were promised people start scratching their heads. They had no idea what economic benefits they were being promised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but them indians and muslims and that, they are eu right? Taking our jobs......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'Lets get all the Poles to come and do the Sheite jobs while we send our kids to Universities to get worthless degrees'. Blaire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here comes the xenophobia. A late appearance by its usual standards on this subject.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by Cinciwolf--Whiney and easily offended! (U11551)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Der Post Nearly Mann. Rangnificent (U1270)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 9 minutes ago
Then they got hoodwinked into voting to leave.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My issue is that even now people can't explain the economic platform they voted for. On one side it was just vague soundbites about the NHS and no explanation of any implementation strategy, and on the other there was no organised messaging to debunk it. In the end it I don't think the economy played any part in the Leave vote, which is why now, faced with the inevitable questioning of whether they're seeing the benefits they were promised people start scratching their heads. They had no idea what economic benefits they were being promised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but them indians and muslims and that, they are eu right? Taking our jobs......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'Lets get all the Poles to come and do the Sheite jobs while we send our kids to Universities to get worthless degrees'. Blaire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, another widely held misconception. It was actually the EU expansion scheme in 2004 that resulted in Poles etc being able to come to the UK. Not Tony Blair.
https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-history/history-eu/2000-09_en
posted on 21/12/21
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 17 minutes ago
“ Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.”
See what happens when you give too much credence to the ramblings of Farage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You see that's one huge mistake right there - assuming that "Remainers" are "Rejoiners".
For me I'd need to see what the case for rejoining was. I doubt we'd get back in with the same terms that we had last time and threw away with the Brexit vote.
For example: the scenario you describe would never have happened with the British veto that Margaret Thatcher went out on a limb to ensure we retained.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
It makes most sense, and why many countries needing a big majority to make such big decisions. Making decisions of this gravity on such a marginal basis is reeetarded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost as reeeetarded as joining without a vote in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We joined following a general election where the winner campaigned on it. You already know that though, as you responded to a post on it. You're just following the natural Brexiter state of repeating falsehoods regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I already said, we joined a common market. Not what the EU ended up being. A big difference and the reason why a lot of the older voters voted for Brexit. Because they didn't forget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were referendums on whether to leave in the 70s. The Labour Party campaigned kn leaving the EEC in the 80s. After the Maaschrict Treaty was signed in the 90s, a political party campaigned every election on leaving or providing a referendum.
You had plenty of chances to vote against it. You just likely didn't care until you were told to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those elections were not one policy campaigns, unlike 2019, many people would have been more focused on other policies, and once Blair was in charge the slide began.
Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.
And here is a benefit of leaving, Freeports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should have also added this has been debunked (Federal State) more times than I can remember. As each member state has an executive veto over treaty change. One of the reasons why the EU has been historically so slow (as had 28 countries all to agree).
And again the EU political system is (PR) considerably more democratic that the UK's (FPTP). And without wishing to state the obvious, political representation is not "unelected"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The commission is unelected and we know that they are the driving force.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
posted on 21/12/21
Post, the pandemic also exposed the lies about the UK and its borders as well.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by Cinciwolf--Whiney and easily offended! (U11551)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by Der Post Nearly Mann. Rangnificent (U1270)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 9 minutes ago
Then they got hoodwinked into voting to leave.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My issue is that even now people can't explain the economic platform they voted for. On one side it was just vague soundbites about the NHS and no explanation of any implementation strategy, and on the other there was no organised messaging to debunk it. In the end it I don't think the economy played any part in the Leave vote, which is why now, faced with the inevitable questioning of whether they're seeing the benefits they were promised people start scratching their heads. They had no idea what economic benefits they were being promised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but them indians and muslims and that, they are eu right? Taking our jobs......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'Lets get all the Poles to come and do the Sheite jobs while we send our kids to Universities to get worthless degrees'. Blaire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, another widely held misconception. It was actually the EU expansion scheme in 2004 that resulted in Poles etc being able to come to the UK. Not Tony Blair.
https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-history/history-eu/2000-09_en
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Knew that Stuart, but was sarcastically replying to the racist comment. Again I have no problem with immigration that was not a factor in my decision.
posted on 21/12/21
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
———
We’ve almost got a full-house.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 17 minutes ago
“ Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.”
See what happens when you give too much credence to the ramblings of Farage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You see that's one huge mistake right there - assuming that "Remainers" are "Rejoiners".
For me I'd need to see what the case for rejoining was. I doubt we'd get back in with the same terms that we had last time and threw away with the Brexit vote.
For example: the scenario you describe would never have happened with the British veto that Margaret Thatcher went out on a limb to ensure we retained.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same here. I'd have to see the terms of rejoining. Given our position is now much weaker, I imagine the terms would be much worse.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
It makes most sense, and why many countries needing a big majority to make such big decisions. Making decisions of this gravity on such a marginal basis is reeetarded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost as reeeetarded as joining without a vote in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We joined following a general election where the winner campaigned on it. You already know that though, as you responded to a post on it. You're just following the natural Brexiter state of repeating falsehoods regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I already said, we joined a common market. Not what the EU ended up being. A big difference and the reason why a lot of the older voters voted for Brexit. Because they didn't forget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were referendums on whether to leave in the 70s. The Labour Party campaigned kn leaving the EEC in the 80s. After the Maaschrict Treaty was signed in the 90s, a political party campaigned every election on leaving or providing a referendum.
You had plenty of chances to vote against it. You just likely didn't care until you were told to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those elections were not one policy campaigns, unlike 2019, many people would have been more focused on other policies, and once Blair was in charge the slide began.
Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.
And here is a benefit of leaving, Freeports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should have also added this has been debunked (Federal State) more times than I can remember. As each member state has an executive veto over treaty change. One of the reasons why the EU has been historically so slow (as had 28 countries all to agree).
And again the EU political system is (PR) considerably more democratic that the UK's (FPTP). And without wishing to state the obvious, political representation is not "unelected"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The commission is unelected and we know that they are the driving force.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cameron was a committed European who cocked up. He desperately needed concessions to head off a referendum. The people driving the vote (with the vested interests) had little interest in any concessions he managed to get agreement to.
posted on 21/12/21
The terms would be worse than we had, but still better than not being in the EU, I suspect.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
It makes most sense, and why many countries needing a big majority to make such big decisions. Making decisions of this gravity on such a marginal basis is reeetarded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost as reeeetarded as joining without a vote in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We joined following a general election where the winner campaigned on it. You already know that though, as you responded to a post on it. You're just following the natural Brexiter state of repeating falsehoods regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I already said, we joined a common market. Not what the EU ended up being. A big difference and the reason why a lot of the older voters voted for Brexit. Because they didn't forget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were referendums on whether to leave in the 70s. The Labour Party campaigned kn leaving the EEC in the 80s. After the Maaschrict Treaty was signed in the 90s, a political party campaigned every election on leaving or providing a referendum.
You had plenty of chances to vote against it. You just likely didn't care until you were told to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those elections were not one policy campaigns, unlike 2019, many people would have been more focused on other policies, and once Blair was in charge the slide began.
Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.
And here is a benefit of leaving, Freeports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should have also added this has been debunked (Federal State) more times than I can remember. As each member state has an executive veto over treaty change. One of the reasons why the EU has been historically so slow (as had 28 countries all to agree).
And again the EU political system is (PR) considerably more democratic that the UK's (FPTP). And without wishing to state the obvious, political representation is not "unelected"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The commission is unelected and we know that they are the driving force.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again not true.
https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/leadership/elections-and-appointments_en
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/8/how-are-the-commission-president-and-commissioners-appointed
The boots on the ground (like our own civil servants) are not elected. Nor would one expect them to be. Unless you feel that the UK should hold elections to appoint it's (nearly 500,000 strong) civil servants??
In regard to Cameron, he got considerably more than any other member state had ever been afforded. Ensuring the UK had more 'opt outs' than any other EU country.
Please see:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105
Not being funny but nearly everything you've posted has been inaccurate, or false.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
Post, the pandemic also exposed the lies about the UK and its borders as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course. It was a mess from top to bottom, and I find the desperate post-rationalisation depressing. Very few people who voted leave are willing to explain their motives either. Like I said, they can't have been economic.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 2 minutes ago
The terms would be worse than we had, but still better than not being in the EU, I suspect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who knows. If I were the EU, I'd try to rinse us now if we rejoined. Our negotiators have already demonstrated their utter incompetence.
posted on 21/12/21
Because many of them fear being called xenophobic and, or, racist because they voted due to foreigners.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 17 minutes ago
“ Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.”
See what happens when you give too much credence to the ramblings of Farage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You see that's one huge mistake right there - assuming that "Remainers" are "Rejoiners".
For me I'd need to see what the case for rejoining was. I doubt we'd get back in with the same terms that we had last time and threw away with the Brexit vote.
For example: the scenario you describe would never have happened with the British veto that Margaret Thatcher went out on a limb to ensure we retained.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same here. I'd have to see the terms of rejoining. Given our position is now much weaker, I imagine the terms would be much worse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They never wanted us to leave, they would bite our hands off to get our money.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 17 minutes ago
“ Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.”
See what happens when you give too much credence to the ramblings of Farage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You see that's one huge mistake right there - assuming that "Remainers" are "Rejoiners".
For me I'd need to see what the case for rejoining was. I doubt we'd get back in with the same terms that we had last time and threw away with the Brexit vote.
For example: the scenario you describe would never have happened with the British veto that Margaret Thatcher went out on a limb to ensure we retained.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same here. I'd have to see the terms of rejoining. Given our position is now much weaker, I imagine the terms would be much worse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They never wanted us to leave, they would bite our hands off to get our money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They need us more than we need them, right?
posted on 21/12/21
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 2 minutes ago
The terms would be worse than we had, but still better than not being in the EU, I suspect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who knows. If I were the EU, I'd try to rinse us now if we rejoined. Our negotiators have already demonstrated their utter incompetence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Would still be better than what we’ll get from outside the EU, though.
Plus our negotiators won’t be the same people anyway, it’d have to be a completely different government that would think about rejoining.
posted on 21/12/21
There’s the full house!
posted on 21/12/21
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 4 minutes ago
Because many of them fear being called xenophobic and, or, racist because they voted due to foreigners.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the smarter ones are starting to realise they've been had.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
It makes most sense, and why many countries needing a big majority to make such big decisions. Making decisions of this gravity on such a marginal basis is reeetarded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost as reeeetarded as joining without a vote in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We joined following a general election where the winner campaigned on it. You already know that though, as you responded to a post on it. You're just following the natural Brexiter state of repeating falsehoods regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I already said, we joined a common market. Not what the EU ended up being. A big difference and the reason why a lot of the older voters voted for Brexit. Because they didn't forget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were referendums on whether to leave in the 70s. The Labour Party campaigned kn leaving the EEC in the 80s. After the Maaschrict Treaty was signed in the 90s, a political party campaigned every election on leaving or providing a referendum.
You had plenty of chances to vote against it. You just likely didn't care until you were told to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those elections were not one policy campaigns, unlike 2019, many people would have been more focused on other policies, and once Blair was in charge the slide began.
Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.
And here is a benefit of leaving, Freeports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should have also added this has been debunked (Federal State) more times than I can remember. As each member state has an executive veto over treaty change. One of the reasons why the EU has been historically so slow (as had 28 countries all to agree).
And again the EU political system is (PR) considerably more democratic that the UK's (FPTP). And without wishing to state the obvious, political representation is not "unelected"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The commission is unelected and we know that they are the driving force.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again not true.
https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/leadership/elections-and-appointments_en
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/8/how-are-the-commission-president-and-commissioners-appointed
The boots on the ground (like our own civil servants) are not elected. Nor would one expect them to be. Unless you feel that the UK should hold elections to appoint it's (nearly 500,000 strong) civil servants??
In regard to Cameron, he got considerably more than any other member state had ever been afforded. Ensuring the UK had more 'opt outs' than any other EU country.
Please see:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105
Not being funny but nearly everything you've posted has been inaccurate, or false.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe, I can see that arguing facts is a no win with you.
But this is not an argument won or lost on facts, it is about feelings and emotions and that is probably why we voted to leave, not political institutions or cost return benefits.
Wishing you all a Merry Xmas and Happy New Year.
Got to start cooking dinner.
posted on 21/12/21
There are rules of accession - the UK would need to agree to accept baseline EU standards. At present the UK would not meet many of these, as it has rejected them to accomodate FTAs with the Aussiess/US etc.
https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/enlargement-policy/glossary/accession-eu_en#:~:text=European%20Commission%20%2D%20Enlargement%20%2D%20Accession%20to%20the%20EU&text=A%20state%20that%20wishes%20to,and%20undertake%20to%20promote%20them.
That's not to say under a different government the UK may have a change of tact in the future. Just can't see it any time soon.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? What age is middle aged? (U3126)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by GunaDave (U7710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jadon The King Sancho (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
It makes most sense, and why many countries needing a big majority to make such big decisions. Making decisions of this gravity on such a marginal basis is reeetarded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost as reeeetarded as joining without a vote in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We joined following a general election where the winner campaigned on it. You already know that though, as you responded to a post on it. You're just following the natural Brexiter state of repeating falsehoods regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I already said, we joined a common market. Not what the EU ended up being. A big difference and the reason why a lot of the older voters voted for Brexit. Because they didn't forget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were referendums on whether to leave in the 70s. The Labour Party campaigned kn leaving the EEC in the 80s. After the Maaschrict Treaty was signed in the 90s, a political party campaigned every election on leaving or providing a referendum.
You had plenty of chances to vote against it. You just likely didn't care until you were told to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those elections were not one policy campaigns, unlike 2019, many people would have been more focused on other policies, and once Blair was in charge the slide began.
Do you rejoiners seriously want to live in a Federal province of a European Empire ruled by unelected Gauleiters.
Because that is where they are heading.
And here is a benefit of leaving, Freeports.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should have also added this has been debunked (Federal State) more times than I can remember. As each member state has an executive veto over treaty change. One of the reasons why the EU has been historically so slow (as had 28 countries all to agree).
And again the EU political system is (PR) considerably more democratic that the UK's (FPTP). And without wishing to state the obvious, political representation is not "unelected"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The commission is unelected and we know that they are the driving force.
Cameron tried to get concessions from them and was told to do one, hence the 2016 referendum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again not true.
https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/leadership/elections-and-appointments_en
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/8/how-are-the-commission-president-and-commissioners-appointed
The boots on the ground (like our own civil servants) are not elected. Nor would one expect them to be. Unless you feel that the UK should hold elections to appoint it's (nearly 500,000 strong) civil servants??
In regard to Cameron, he got considerably more than any other member state had ever been afforded. Ensuring the UK had more 'opt outs' than any other EU country.
Please see:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105
Not being funny but nearly everything you've posted has been inaccurate, or false.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe, I can see that arguing facts is a no win with you.
But this is not an argument won or lost on facts, it is about feelings and emotions and that is probably why we voted to leave, not political institutions or cost return benefits.
Wishing you all a Merry Xmas and Happy New Year.
Got to start cooking dinner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You too
Page 15 of 21
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20