Off Topic UK / EU Future

What are you talking about? He cannot even get elected to Parliament. When exposed to actual electors in a GE he has been rumbled every time.

 

Leaving is more popular than remaining, it should be simple enough for you to understand.

 

The Tories had the power to give him a safe seat as you should know.

 

I thought that you had told us that staying in the SM/CU was the same as staying in. Changed your mind and would be happy with that arrangement now?

 

Now I know you are joking. He had left the Tory party. Are you suggesting that the Tories should only have MPs that they choose to have in Westminster? That is taking democracy down a very dangerous road.

 

No, that arrangement is as equally poor as remaining in the EU. You should understand leaving is leaving, remaining is remaining. Glad for you to highlight the majority in the UK want to leave the EU.

 

Could you make that clearer. Staying in the SM/CU is the same as staying in or not, as you seem to be arguing against yourself.

 

The suggestion was from a Daily Telegraph leader column, not mine. Do you not understand many defeated MP's are found safe seats to return to parliament a.s.a.p.? There is a well established precedent for central office to 'promote' candidates. I would have thought our Nige would have been a very popular candidate at most local Tory party selection shortlists, especially at the moment.

 

Legally it is not, the trading restrictions on both are similarly damaging.

 

He is not a Tory, and stood against the Tory party. For goodness sake use a little common sense.

 

Legally it is not what?

 

Many MPs change political parties, Farage is a natural Tory, he promoted UKIP and his new Brexit party because the incumbent Tory leaders were not acting like Tories. The Telegraph were using common sense by suggesting Farage could have been a valuable asset to the government. Hopefully the new Tory leader has more imagination and skill to embrace such bold ideas.

 

the same. You are saying remaining in the UK or leaving under SM/ CU is the same, legally they are different entities, that should be obvious.

 

Yes I do know that, but you have argued for ages that staying in them was the same as remaining because the freedoms would still be in place. I was agreeing with you, but you didn't wish to think so. So that 16% can be added to the other 44% I think we can agree. In any case 44% for revoke was far more popular than the next option on only 27%

 

No, you are confused again. Clearly staying or leaving but remaining in either the SM and/or CM are different entities but what they have in common is several negative traits. Only a rabid remainer could 'fix' a clear result for leaving into something else.

 

I think it is you that is confused. You might wish to try and talk about legalities, but you have clearly been against against staying in the SM/CU because you said it would be the same as staying. Still I think there can be little argument that on 27% your solution is not thought of very highly.

 

Excuse me?? Perhaps YOU will treat other posters with respect.. OK for you to call me an [edit] is it then? You just love deflection....

Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk

 

No, I said some of the negative effects of leaving but remaining in the SM/CU would be as bad as remaining. Is it a bit too complicated for you?

 

You are waffling. Everyone on here who read this thread know what you have been saying for months. Stop trying to change your mind while at the same time make out that you haven't.

 

A small price to pay.