|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 3, 2019 19:07:45 GMT
Like I said, I’m an extreme remainer. For me, the end justifies the means. Revoke Article 50, 2nd referendum, leaving with a deal, leaving without a deal.....whatever option one chooses will be painful and will leave a portion of the public unhappy. My role as a voter is to vote for a party that best represents my view on the issues I care most deeply about. It’s not my role to vote in a way that considers the opinions of those who think differently to me ahead of my own. When those 17.4 million voted to leave the EU did they think about the economic and personal consequences of those who would suffer as a result of leaving? Of course they didn’t and rightly not. The beauty of this election is that there are parties representing a broad range of options on Brexit among other things. If a friend wants to honour the referendum result, I would wholeheartedly back their decision to vote Tory or Brexit Party. It doesn’t make them evil for having a different perspective on what’s best for the country. I have leave voting friends who will be voting Tory and at the end of the day we agree to disagree. Vote for whoever best represents your point of view and don’t let anyone persuade you otherwise. We should not have a 2nd referendum because then there is no point in having referendums as we’ll simply keep having one until a certain amount of people are happy and that isn’t how it works. This is partly why the Scottish where dismayed at the SNP for wanting another one on the union simply because they lost the first one. If you vote against the EU, they normally get you to vote again and again until it goes the way they want ... exactly what a good number of remainers are advocating ... |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Nov 3, 2019 19:41:55 GMT
We should not have a 2nd referendum because then there is no point in having referendums as we’ll simply keep having one until a certain amount of people are happy and that isn’t how it works. This is partly why the Scottish where dismayed at the SNP for wanting another one on the union simply because they lost the first one. If you vote against the EU, they normally get you to vote again and again until it goes the way they want ... exactly what a good number of remainers are advocating ... I am a remainer. I am not advocating voting again and again. However I do think that there needs to be a second referendum, based on the proposed deal for leaving the EU and giving the chance for debate on the implications of leaving the EU with that deal, so that the people of the United Kingdom can make an informed choice to leave or remain. Of course, I remain (no pun intended) of the opinion that the result of the 2016 referendum should have been declared null and void, due to the alleged corruption which allegedly swayed the vote towards a narrow victory for leave. I thought that was going to be investigated; whatever happened to that? |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 3, 2019 19:49:17 GMT
I voted to Remain, and I would again tomorrow. However, I fail to see how revoking A50 is the right option.The 2016 referrendum was had one of the highest turnouts of any democratic exercise in British history. The fact is that 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU. Many of these people are discontented we haven't left yet, putting aside why they voted Brexit, revocation of A50 does nothing to solve this. Our country is already divided, and polarised. How is revoking Article 50, ignoring the will of 17.4 million people, and ignoring a huge democratic excercise going to heal divisions? The Lib Dems are just throwing their toys out of the pram because they can't accept the fact they lost the referrendum, putting aside the idealistic nonsense of the policy the've constructed which had made them an extreme paty who are only pandering to the remainers. At least if you had another referrendum, then you could use that to re-evaulate the situation, but this idea that everything will be fine if article 50 is revoked is bile.
I know a general election is not a district replacement for a new referendum, but things have changed. At its very simplest Boris deal is long way from what the leave campaign promised, all sorts of details are different. For something with a result of only 3-4% difference, cannot be any statistical confidence that had the correct facts been presented, result might have varied. Additionally the electorate has changed, about 2.5m were excluded as too young, but have since become 18 before implementation date. Also about 2.5m have died. So electorate has changed by about triple the winning margin. Therefore the referendum is out of date. Whatever happens some people won’t be happy. I have no idea what the result will be, but I could easily see 50-100 seats going tactical (where one or more parties stand aside to give common opposition to sitting party). Probably discover lot more in week or two. Of the 2 big parties, Conservatives have a marmite leader, some love him, some hate him. Labour is likely to be punished for dithering and a weak leader. That leaves most others with Lib Dems, Greens, the Brexit/Farage route, or a Celtic local party (last one not really applicable to London). The one thing about an Article 50 is business can start moving forward again, and all the other items such as moving home can restart as uncertainty about rules going forward is lifted. Brexit deals could have taken years to get with some countries, and all the hanging around being uncertain when and if a deal might happen is frustrating for everyone and a big negative to any form of investment spending. Yes, some people have died since the last referendum, and some who weren't elegible to vote then are now. However, I didn't hear any remoaners winging about the 1975 referrendum being over forty years out of date, and yet the keep droning on about how a referendum merely 41 months ago is so out of date. Yes, some things have changed, there have been many developments. There will have been people who turned 18 on June 24th 2016, should we have delayed the referendum by a day for them? Oh but what about people who turn 18 on June 25th, should we delay the referrendum by another day, and so on and so on. The argument for holding a referendum on our membership of the EU was that many Britons hadn't had a say on Europe, people who turned 18 on 6th June 1975 for example, yet I didn't see people droning on about this pedantic difference.
Now for the GE. I think Labour will be punished, but I don't think they will do as badly as some are suggesting. I think they will lose seats in the north where people are furious we haven't left yet, and some in the south where remainers don't feel they're remain enough, so will vote LD, in Scotland they'll be wiped out by the SNP. I think that the more Labour shift the focus away from Brexit, the better they will do, and that will pull the rug out from under the Lib Dems. The spoiler effect will be a game changer. In some northern seats, I think disgruntled people who turn to the Brexit Party instead of the Tories will let Labour back in that seat, and likewise with remainers flocking to the Lib Dems, yet some sticking to Labour, this could either let Labour back in or result in a Tory gain. I think that the Tories will hoover up support in leave towns, at the expense of their seats in the south, but making net gains. The Lib Dems won't do as well as some think, because general elections feature more tactical voting. I think people are sensible enough to realise there will never be a Lib Dem government, and most seats are a two horse race so its who you hate less in many circumstances. To use an example local to me, Ealing Central and Acton voted 71% in favour of remaining, this could allow the Lib Dems in as they're campaigning very aggressively, however, Labour have a strong vote in the constitency, and Rupa Huq's majority is 13,807 (was 274 back in 2015). This split in the vote will likely decimate Huq's majority, as the Tories in Ealing will be wiped out.
|
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 3, 2019 19:52:23 GMT
Like I said, I’m an extreme remainer. For me, the end justifies the means. Revoke Article 50, 2nd referendum, leaving with a deal, leaving without a deal.....whatever option one chooses will be painful and will leave a portion of the public unhappy. My role as a voter is to vote for a party that best represents my view on the issues I care most deeply about. It’s not my role to vote in a way that considers the opinions of those who think differently to me ahead of my own. When those 17.4 million voted to leave the EU did they think about the economic and personal consequences of those who would suffer as a result of leaving? Of course they didn’t and rightly not. The beauty of this election is that there are parties representing a broad range of options on Brexit among other things. If a friend wants to honour the referendum result, I would wholeheartedly back their decision to vote Tory or Brexit Party. It doesn’t make them evil for having a different perspective on what’s best for the country. I have leave voting friends who will be voting Tory and at the end of the day we agree to disagree. Vote for whoever best represents your point of view and don’t let anyone persuade you otherwise. We should not have a 2nd referendum because then there is no point in having referendums as we’ll simply keep having one until a certain amount of people are happy and that isn’t how it works. This is partly why the Scottish where dismayed at the SNP for wanting another one on the union simply because they lost the first one. Exactly. The late Paddy Ashdown said he would 'forgive no one' who does not accept the result of the referendum, maybe Swinson should take his advice. Another referendum would just bring back to toxicity and divisons of the last one, which I'm sure many would agree was a nasty campaign on both sides with lots of xenephobia and scaremongering. Why should people vote in the next referendum if their vote in the previous one is just to be ignored, its just a veiled attempt to sabotage Brexit. |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Nov 3, 2019 21:03:25 GMT
We should not have a 2nd referendum because then there is no point in having referendums as we’ll simply keep having one until a certain amount of people are happy and that isn’t how it works. This is partly why the Scottish where dismayed at the SNP for wanting another one on the union simply because they lost the first one. Exactly. The late Paddy Ashdown said he would 'forgive no one' who does not accept the result of the referendum, maybe Swinson should take his advice. Another referendum would just bring back to toxicity and divisons of the last one, which I'm sure many would agree was a nasty campaign on both sides with lots of xenephobia and scaremongering. Why should people vote in the next referendum if their vote in the previous one is just to be ignored, its just a veiled attempt to sabotage Brexit. Although I'm ever more convinced we're doing the wrong thing, I can't say I really support a second referendum, which I suspect would no more produce a decisive result than the last one. On the other hand, if the LibDems form the government (about as likely as me winning the lottery) then we know they'd revoke Article 150, as would anyone who voted for them, so that would be acceptable. |
|
|
|
Post by busman on Nov 4, 2019 7:57:01 GMT
Exactly. The late Paddy Ashdown said he would 'forgive no one' who does not accept the result of the referendum, maybe Swinson should take his advice. Another referendum would just bring back to toxicity and divisons of the last one, which I'm sure many would agree was a nasty campaign on both sides with lots of xenephobia and scaremongering. Why should people vote in the next referendum if their vote in the previous one is just to be ignored, its just a veiled attempt to sabotage Brexit. Although I'm ever more convinced we're doing the wrong thing, I can't say I really support a second referendum, which I suspect would no more produce a decisive result than the last one. On the other hand, if the LibDems form the government (about as likely as me winning the lottery) then we know they'd revoke Article 150, as would anyone who voted for them, so that would be acceptable. That’s where I’m at in my thinking at the moment. The result of any 2nd referendum is likely to be just as marginal as the first. Not so much a problem if Leave wins again, but if Remain won with an equally small margin it would be a massive headache. The cleanest way forward for the country is to vote in a majority government for a party that would deal with Brexit quickly by either accepting a deal (Johnson’s or May’s) or by revoking article 50 upon election. The quicker Brexit is dealt with, the quicker our government can focus again on domestic issues. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Nov 4, 2019 8:39:49 GMT
I know a general election is not a district replacement for a new referendum, but things have changed. At its very simplest Boris deal is long way from what the leave campaign promised, all sorts of details are different. For something with a result of only 3-4% difference, cannot be any statistical confidence that had the correct facts been presented, result might have varied. Additionally the electorate has changed, about 2.5m were excluded as too young, but have since become 18 before implementation date. Also about 2.5m have died. So electorate has changed by about triple the winning margin. Therefore the referendum is out of date. Whatever happens some people won’t be happy. I have no idea what the result will be, but I could easily see 50-100 seats going tactical (where one or more parties stand aside to give common opposition to sitting party). Probably discover lot more in week or two. Of the 2 big parties, Conservatives have a marmite leader, some love him, some hate him. Labour is likely to be punished for dithering and a weak leader. That leaves most others with Lib Dems, Greens, the Brexit/Farage route, or a Celtic local party (last one not really applicable to London). The one thing about an Article 50 is business can start moving forward again, and all the other items such as moving home can restart as uncertainty about rules going forward is lifted. Brexit deals could have taken years to get with some countries, and all the hanging around being uncertain when and if a deal might happen is frustrating for everyone and a big negative to any form of investment spending. Yes, some people have died since the last referendum, and some who weren't elegible to vote then are now. However, I didn't hear any remoaners winging about the 1975 referrendum being over forty years out of date, and yet the keep droning on about how a referendum merely 41 months ago is so out of date. Yes, some things have changed, there have been many developments. There will have been people who turned 18 on June 24th 2016, should we have delayed the referendum by a day for them? Oh but what about people who turn 18 on June 25th, should we delay the referrendum by another day, and so on and so on. The argument for holding a referendum on our membership of the EU was that many Britons hadn't had a say on Europe, people who turned 18 on 6th June 1975 for example, yet I didn't see people droning on about this pedantic difference.
Now for the GE. I think Labour will be punished, but I don't think they will do as badly as some are suggesting. I think they will lose seats in the north where people are furious we haven't left yet, and some in the south where remainers don't feel they're remain enough, so will vote LD, in Scotland they'll be wiped out by the SNP. I think that the more Labour shift the focus away from Brexit, the better they will do, and that will pull the rug out from under the Lib Dems. The spoiler effect will be a game changer. In some northern seats, I think disgruntled people who turn to the Brexit Party instead of the Tories will let Labour back in that seat, and likewise with remainers flocking to the Lib Dems, yet some sticking to Labour, this could either let Labour back in or result in a Tory gain. I think that the Tories will hoover up support in leave towns, at the expense of their seats in the south, but making net gains. The Lib Dems won't do as well as some think, because general elections feature more tactical voting. I think people are sensible enough to realise there will never be a Lib Dem government, and most seats are a two horse race so its who you hate less in many circumstances. To use an example local to me, Ealing Central and Acton voted 71% in favour of remaining, this could allow the Lib Dems in as they're campaigning very aggressively, however, Labour have a strong vote in the constitency, and Rupa Huq's majority is 13,807 (was 274 back in 2015). This split in the vote will likely decimate Huq's majority, as the Tories in Ealing will be wiped out.
I don't think Brexit party would do well at this election nor the lib dems and people would go back to either Labour or Conservative as per general elections. The euro elections are different and not everyone tends to go out and vote, hence why brexit party did well. In places like Ealing as in London its the type of voter as they would always vote Labour no matter what and would never differentiate. To me that is stupid, they see the party like a football team and some don't even understand politics and just vote as if it were social media or x-factor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2019 11:07:37 GMT
I think we have all been fooled into getting involved in what has always been a Tory obsession. Whatever views I had in 2016 , welll frankly I’ve lost all interest. Brexit has obsessed and paralysis has set in at Westminster, I wonder how many people actually give a toss anymore.
I predict both Tory and Labour will hurt , Lib Dem’s and Green will do well. Hung parliament, but possibly a Lib Dem , Green and others alliance, ousting Johnson and Corbyn.
|
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 4, 2019 15:45:20 GMT
Yes, some people have died since the last referendum, and some who weren't elegible to vote then are now. However, I didn't hear any remoaners winging about the 1975 referrendum being over forty years out of date, and yet the keep droning on about how a referendum merely 41 months ago is so out of date. Yes, some things have changed, there have been many developments. There will have been people who turned 18 on June 24th 2016, should we have delayed the referendum by a day for them? Oh but what about people who turn 18 on June 25th, should we delay the referrendum by another day, and so on and so on. The argument for holding a referendum on our membership of the EU was that many Britons hadn't had a say on Europe, people who turned 18 on 6th June 1975 for example, yet I didn't see people droning on about this pedantic difference.
Now for the GE. I think Labour will be punished, but I don't think they will do as badly as some are suggesting. I think they will lose seats in the north where people are furious we haven't left yet, and some in the south where remainers don't feel they're remain enough, so will vote LD, in Scotland they'll be wiped out by the SNP. I think that the more Labour shift the focus away from Brexit, the better they will do, and that will pull the rug out from under the Lib Dems. The spoiler effect will be a game changer. In some northern seats, I think disgruntled people who turn to the Brexit Party instead of the Tories will let Labour back in that seat, and likewise with remainers flocking to the Lib Dems, yet some sticking to Labour, this could either let Labour back in or result in a Tory gain. I think that the Tories will hoover up support in leave towns, at the expense of their seats in the south, but making net gains. The Lib Dems won't do as well as some think, because general elections feature more tactical voting. I think people are sensible enough to realise there will never be a Lib Dem government, and most seats are a two horse race so its who you hate less in many circumstances. To use an example local to me, Ealing Central and Acton voted 71% in favour of remaining, this could allow the Lib Dems in as they're campaigning very aggressively, however, Labour have a strong vote in the constitency, and Rupa Huq's majority is 13,807 (was 274 back in 2015). This split in the vote will likely decimate Huq's majority, as the Tories in Ealing will be wiped out.
I don't think Brexit party would do well at this election nor the lib dems and people would go back to either Labour or Conservative as per general elections. The euro elections are different and not everyone tends to go out and vote, hence why brexit party did well. In places like Ealing as in London its the type of voter as they would always vote Labour no matter what and would never differentiate. To me that is stupid, they see the party like a football team and some don't even understand politics and just vote as if it were social media or x-factor.
I think the Brexit Party will obtain a sizeable share of the vote, but I don't think they will break through in any contituencies, instead it will just be an example of the spoiler effect, but of course because general elections use first past the post rather than proportional representation, of course the Brexit Party won't get through, anyone with a brain cell should realise that their constituency is a two horse race, and this is the case nationall too, Swinson is deluded when she suggests she is a ''candidate to be prime minister.'' I agree that people who support Labour like a football team are idiots, these people seem to think that if you disagree with them you are mentally inferior, and they just vote labour because its what they've been spoonfed by their parents.
|
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Nov 10, 2019 17:57:46 GMT
O dear it drags on! Now we have a General Election on the 12th December! Funny this is now the second time a Prime Minister has decided they didn't like what the public said and have decided to have another vote. Listen to the public regarding the referendum result but not regarding the 2015 or 2017 election results  Might replicate May and lose even more seats... Polls don't mean everything, so this could finish the Tories off. Who else would they drag in to prop them up if they already have a -41 majority?  |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Dec 14, 2019 19:21:30 GMT
Leaving aside my reasons for wishing we could have stayed in the EU, I had 2 reasons for wanting a People's Vote: Firstly, it was not government policy to leave the EU at the time, meaning that how we leave and what agreement we had with the EU was not defined. Secondly, assuming that Brexit happened in January 2020 (which it now surely will), it meant that voters born between June 1998 and January 2002 were being disenfranchised from the democratic process regarding EU membership or lack of it. This, despite the fact that they will have to live with this longer than the rest of us.  What is fairer now is that the government have negotiated a Withdrawal Agreement and offered themselves for re-election with this as an election pledge. The current electorate had a choice of parties with different Brexit policies. Abstainers could have taken the trouble to vote for pro-EU parties, and more pro-EU voters could have voted tactically had they so wanted. To be fair to the Conservatives, they listened to the public following the 2016 result, they took the time to negotiate a Withdrawal Agreement, and even put themselves up for re-election on the basis of this Agreement (and other issues too). Regardless of my disappointment, I concede that implementing this Brexit now is inevitable and is fairer democratically than without this General Election. That said, I am still focussing my range of bus trips across the country on the basis of at least 60% being based on Remain boroughs!  |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Dec 14, 2019 21:37:38 GMT
Yes, some people have died since the last referendum, and some who weren't elegible to vote then are now. However, I didn't hear any remoaners winging about the 1975 referrendum being over forty years out of date, and yet the keep droning on about how a referendum merely 41 months ago is so out of date. Yes, some things have changed, there have been many developments. There will have been people who turned 18 on June 24th 2016, should we have delayed the referendum by a day for them? Oh but what about people who turn 18 on June 25th, should we delay the referrendum by another day, and so on and so on. The argument for holding a referendum on our membership of the EU was that many Britons hadn't had a say on Europe, people who turned 18 on 6th June 1975 for example, yet I didn't see people droning on about this pedantic difference.
Now for the GE. I think Labour will be punished, but I don't think they will do as badly as some are suggesting. I think they will lose seats in the north where people are furious we haven't left yet, and some in the south where remainers don't feel they're remain enough, so will vote LD, in Scotland they'll be wiped out by the SNP. I think that the more Labour shift the focus away from Brexit, the better they will do, and that will pull the rug out from under the Lib Dems. The spoiler effect will be a game changer. In some northern seats, I think disgruntled people who turn to the Brexit Party instead of the Tories will let Labour back in that seat, and likewise with remainers flocking to the Lib Dems, yet some sticking to Labour, this could either let Labour back in or result in a Tory gain. I think that the Tories will hoover up support in leave towns, at the expense of their seats in the south, but making net gains. The Lib Dems won't do as well as some think, because general elections feature more tactical voting. I think people are sensible enough to realise there will never be a Lib Dem government, and most seats are a two horse race so its who you hate less in many circumstances. To use an example local to me, Ealing Central and Acton voted 71% in favour of remaining, this could allow the Lib Dems in as they're campaigning very aggressively, however, Labour have a strong vote in the constitency, and Rupa Huq's majority is 13,807 (was 274 back in 2015). This split in the vote will likely decimate Huq's majority, as the Tories in Ealing will be wiped out.
I don't think Brexit party would do well at this election nor the lib dems and people would go back to either Labour or Conservative as per general elections. The euro elections are different and not everyone tends to go out and vote, hence why brexit party did well. In places like Ealing as in London its the type of voter as they would always vote Labour no matter what and would never differentiate. To me that is stupid, they see the party like a football team and some don't even understand politics and just vote as if it were social media or x-factor.
I was right, only wrong thinking that Labour would have put up a good fight, shocking.... |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Dec 14, 2019 21:38:29 GMT
I think we have all been fooled into getting involved in what has always been a Tory obsession. Whatever views I had in 2016 , welll frankly I’ve lost all interest. Brexit has obsessed and paralysis has set in at Westminster, I wonder how many people actually give a toss anymore. I predict both Tory and Labour will hurt , Lib Dem’s and Green will do well. Hung parliament, but possibly a Lib Dem , Green and others alliance, ousting Johnson and Corbyn. You was wrong, one thing I would love to see though is the look on John Berow's face and Gina Miller |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Dec 14, 2019 21:43:48 GMT
Leaving aside my reasons for wishing we could have stayed in the EU, I had 2 reasons for wanting a People's Vote: Firstly, it was not government policy to leave the EU at the time, meaning that how we leave and what agreement we had with the EU was not defined. Secondly, assuming that Brexit happened in January 2020 (which it now surely will), it meant that voters born between June 1998 and January 2002 were being disenfranchised from the democratic process regarding EU membership or lack of it. This, despite the fact that they will have to live with this longer than the rest of us. What is fairer now is that the government have negotiated a Withdrawal Agreement and offered themselves for re-election with this as an election pledge. The current electorate had a choice of parties with different Brexit policies. Abstainers could have taken the trouble to vote for pro-EU parties, and more pro-EU voters could have voted tactically had they so wanted. To be fair to the Conservatives, they listened to the public following the 2016 result, they took the time to negotiate a Withdrawal Agreement, and even put themselves up for re-election on the basis of this Agreement (and other issues too). Regardless of my disappointment, I concede that implementing this Brexit now is inevitable and is fairer democratically than without this General Election. That said, I am still focussing my range of bus trips across the country on the basis of at least 60% being based on Remain boroughs! We already had a peoples that and that was the referendum, I can see a second referendum giving a stronger result to leave. Remoaners just cannot accept defeat, people are fedup of the EU, leftist polices and cant stand being dictated on everything and do not want a backward communist regime. Remoaners just make so much noise and think that everyone is behind them, but leavers may be silent in public etc, but when it comes to the polls, they would make their voice heard.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Dec 14, 2019 23:04:00 GMT
Leaving aside my reasons for wishing we could have stayed in the EU, I had 2 reasons for wanting a People's Vote: Firstly, it was not government policy to leave the EU at the time, meaning that how we leave and what agreement we had with the EU was not defined. Secondly, assuming that Brexit happened in January 2020 (which it now surely will), it meant that voters born between June 1998 and January 2002 were being disenfranchised from the democratic process regarding EU membership or lack of it. This, despite the fact that they will have to live with this longer than the rest of us. What is fairer now is that the government have negotiated a Withdrawal Agreement and offered themselves for re-election with this as an election pledge. The current electorate had a choice of parties with different Brexit policies. Abstainers could have taken the trouble to vote for pro-EU parties, and more pro-EU voters could have voted tactically had they so wanted. To be fair to the Conservatives, they listened to the public following the 2016 result, they took the time to negotiate a Withdrawal Agreement, and even put themselves up for re-election on the basis of this Agreement (and other issues too). Regardless of my disappointment, I concede that implementing this Brexit now is inevitable and is fairer democratically than without this General Election. That said, I am still focussing my range of bus trips across the country on the basis of at least 60% being based on Remain boroughs! We already had a peoples that and that was the referendum, I can see a second referendum giving a stronger result to leave. Remoaners just cannot accept defeat, people are fedup of the EU, leftist polices and cant stand being dictated on everything and do not want a backward communist regime. Remoaners just make so much noise and think that everyone is behind them, but leavers may be silent in public etc, but when it comes to the polls, they would make their voice heard.
I think a second referendum would probably just be as tight as the first one. The issue I see is that many politicians who are remain say that the people who initially voted for Brexit didn't know what they were voting for which I feel is effectively treating them with contempt. The obvious difference being they were lied to on many occasions however that's a separate can of worms. I am a remainer myself but this is frankly getting ridiculous and we should just leave now and move on. If the economy now booms as a result then the Brexiteers can enjoy themselves, however should the economy fall into recession as a result of Brexit then they are equally as responsible. |
|
