On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 23:50:32 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

On Wednesday, 18 September 2019 17:13:07 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 08:17:38 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

On Wednesday, 18 September 2019 11:33:08 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2019 11:01:04 +0100, Pamela
wrote:

On 17:15 17 Sep 2019, Brian Reay wrote:

On 17/09/2019 16:07, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
The Remainers keep telling us what the Brexiteers (supposedly) think, so
why do you suddenly need to ask?

Perhaps the Remainers have come to their senses and realised just how
arrogant and stupid they look.

Odd really. Brexiteers are all so convinced a no deal exit is what the
people voted for. But very against a second referendum where that belief
could be tested.

I don't want a second referendum anymore than I wanted the first one. But
it does seem those who who did secretly believe it was a fluke.


There you go again.

Maybe you are uncertain why you voted the way you did. That doesn't mean
others are.

At the time of the referendum how did you manage to know those facts which
only emerged later? Such as details of the leaving deal, the arrangement for
the NI border (which no one knows, even now), the impact on daily life in
Britain, the amount of the divorce payment, and so on?

Of course he didn't and even if he did, he didn't consider them of
sufficient importance for *him* not to be confident that we should
*ALL* leave the EU.

On the other hand, all Remainers knew in minute details what staying was like
because they were already living it.

Quite, even if it should change in the future as we would be part of
that process ('of course').


The problem is we won't be part of it.

Of course we will and certainly far more then we would if out of it
and still be obliged to such decisions (as we would, irrespective of
how you fantasise otherwise).

Lying politicians have signed us up for stuff on the quiet and would do so again.

Of course they have and will again but how can we rectify that when we
not part of the process?

I'm talking about our own politicians not the dross in the EUSSR.

My reply applies to both.

If we don't have representation in the EU but are (and we will be)
obliged to still conform to most of their rules (manufacturing
standards etc, because we still need to deal with them on many
levels), we will be even less empowered than we were before we left.

You (lot) didn't think it though did you, now you are too embarrassed
to admit it.

Most people write a list with two headings, Pros and Cons. Our
membership has both (of course) and most right minded people would
have a good quantity of each. Fanatic Brexiteers of course would have
*nothing* in the Pro column, demonstrating just how blinkered, biased
and in denial they are.

For the reasonable people, the bottom line might come down to how any
change from the status quo looks like it's going to affect 'most
people' (eg, not just harry) because it's when the majority of people
are happy, most / more things can get done.

Deciding something as big as this (where 'big' = 'potential negative
impact') on voting noise is ridiculous and will never be respected by
me.

Cheers, T i m