I think it was the leaflet delivered by the government to 27 million homes before the referendum. Pretty sure I read mine.
No. You are right. But that's the price you pay if you do have to go back cap in hand begging to be allowed back in. Should have thought about that. That is why we now have to get on with it and cut a deal without destroying any lingering good will. Either that or bribe them. I'm told the EU leadership are all corrupt so should be easy. Perhaps we could send out Redknapp to negotiate? .
The leaflet (costing £9 million) was sent out on the 9 April, the week before it was announced that the two sides were each allowed to spend £7million from 15 April.
Or leave like we were told we would. If we were made to beg, do you think the majority who voted to leave would ever forgive the establishment. Like I said before, that would create a climate just asking for a rise in extremism, which would cause much bigger problems than are forecast over leaving.
I'm sure bc7 is right. I'm sure every one of the 33 million of us who voted knew what we were voting for. Inside our own heads, we did, anyway. We all had our own perception of what the outcome would be if the result was "leave" and if the result was "remain". The question was simple, but what we had in our heads was not. It was personal. The problem continues to be this. What might actually happen as we leave isn't what everyone who voted leave had inside their heads when they marked their cross on the paper. People claim they know, but they don't. They can only speak for themselves. So, when someone who is vocal about leaving at any cost tries to say we all knew that "leave" meant No Deal or WTO or Norway or Jersey or Canada or Switzerland - they're wrong. They can only speak for themselves, what they knew, and what was going on inside their head. You might try and find out by asking a more detailed question. You might try and usurp the result by claiming everybody wanted what you wanted. But we don't know anything at the moment other than it was 52/48 for a poorly-defined outcome. Which is why we're in a mess. The outcome is broadly understood yet completely undefined. All the noise about the EU27 trying to punish us, the "enemies within", the implied threats of civil unrest - that's all it is. Noise. The 48% deserves a chance to speak about what sort of "leave" the country has. The unknown number within the 52% who wanted Norway deserves the chance to have their preference registered rather than stolen by the ones who want No Deal and a power grab by the alt right or alt left. Only people who fear that democracy will prevent them getting what they want would object to this. And when they object, they'll use "democracy" as the reason. They're wrong.
Fair question Col and one that I do ponder over. In all honesty, I didn't truly understand it all and probably even less so now. If i were to fix my time machine and go back, I would vote to remain. I didn't and don't see what was really wrong with being in the EU, having said that, I don't really have a comparison to judge having being born in the late 70's. I try to keep an open mind as much as possible and I %100 know that if I had voted leave and all this **** was dragging on like it is, then I would be fuming. In my opinion it's the 'leave voter' who is being led up the garden path so to speak. I'm probably wrong and should just stick to football and plastering!!!
I think what Cameron said (not sure how many people listened) in the run up to the referendum was that the UK would leave the single market etc etc in the event of a leave vote. Seemed pretty clear to me. https://www.politico.eu/article/dav...eu-referendum-vote-june-23-consequences-news/ Of course he was saying this as a scare tactic, but as the head of the Government it’s fair enough to take him at his word. We can debate forever what people thought they were voting for and we will never know the answer (and why they voted is a more interesting question). But the logical thing, from my Remainer perspective, would be to assume that it meant a total break with the EU followed by trade agreements with the EU and anyone else. Where it was ****ed up (apart from the result itself) was that there was sufficient doubt about what ‘leave’ actually meant for the arguments to begin, and there simply aren’t enough real Brexiters with competence in positions of power to drive through any kind of Brexit vision (not that I think such a thing exists). The implementation has been left to a bunch of people of limited competence who don’t have their hearts in it (or actively don’t want it to happen) plus people like Johnson who is transparently only interested in himself, and Davis who really is a severely limited politician and serial flouncer. The Establishment is still the Establishment and the Establishment doesn’t want to leave the EU. But they haven’t got the bollocks to be up front about it. If I was a Leaver I’d be pissed off about it, but I’m not. There are compromises available that would be tolerable to the majority of the electorate, but it seems that the trenches are now dug so deep we aren’t allowed to meet in no mans land and sort something out, let alone do the same with the EU. Epic, galactic scale cluster **** which has left everyone unhappy. A unique achievement Mr Cameron.
Very considered and reasonable. The logical conclusion for me is that we are now moving away from the political system we have been used to and that leave and remain parties will fight the next general election.
But exactly the same can be said about the original referendum to join the Common Market. People were sure what they were voting for then too. We now know they were lied to and that they were voting to join a political union as much as a common market. So, that result stood, as should this one. Maybe you'll get another chance in a few decades time.
The problem with this is that do we then give the people who wanted "No deal" a say, and "WTO", and "Norway, Jersey ,Canada, Switzerland" and Scotland and London.
