[B0ycey]

I'm not sure but some people might be thinking there will be a repeat of the 1997 General Election result of a landslide Labour Party victory partly because of the divisions and so on in the Tories over the EU in the early 1990s. That's only a possibility, and my money isn't on it. The Polls are neck-to-neck. Corbyn can get either a 1 or 2-point Labour Party lead at most. So I'm not optimistic.

Personally I think the success of Labour in the next General Election really depends on the stupidity of the Tories. Under another Labour leader there would be a big Labour lead rather than a four points deficit at the moment because the Tories are a complete clusterfuck. Also they have gotten away without being punished heavily today in the polls because the reality of Brexit has not hit everyones pockets... yet. But they shouldn't be complacent. I am pretty sure under Hard Brexit the UK public would vote for Frank Spencer over a government who actively went out of its way to crash the economy. So if that is Corbyn vs the Tories, Corbyn may well do better than Blair in 1997 actually. Not because he is a great choice but because the Tories are such a bad choice.

[Nonsense]

You missed the point. It doesn't matter whether or not there is a debate in parliament, the numbers alone have made the petition worthwhile. May, Corbyn or anyone else for that matter can't say Brexit is the will of the people or not expect repercussions if they continue the 'Hard Brexit route. When Farage can only muster 200 people for a rally, you can see clearly that the Hard Brexiteers are a dying breed FYI.



Corbyn is Marmite. Only a complete fuck up by the Tories will mean a majority Labour victory in the next election. Also the Tories will be judged by Brexit. And I can assure you now most of the UK just want this mess to end without costing them anything and only a few like you consider revoking article 50 a vote loser. So if the Tories need to revoke article 50 to avoid a being judged harshly by the fallout of the Brexit shitfest then so be it. Also I think you overestimate the Brexiteer mood in the UK. They are the dying minority and the next election will be fought for the remain vote as they are the growing power today and not for restoring some form of lost democracy.

Nonsense -

'leave' is the 'will of the people'.


The petition numbers alone, as you say, do not matter, so, therefore, it was not worthwhile, for the reasons given.

'Remain' is not the will of the people, 'BREXIT' is a 'remainer' agenda, the people never voted on 'BREXIT', the question was 'remain' or 'Leave', nothing too difficult there to chew on.

The 'deal', now rejected twice, is a 'remainers' attempt at moderating 'Leave', all the government had to do was agree on our immediate liabilities & declare the type of future relationship between us.

None of the above should have been contingent on the success of the other, each issue should have been separately agreed, the 'red lines' are, despite protestations by remainers, integral to the E.U integrity, but, only relevent if a 'deal' is made in respect of customs.

A future trade deal could have been started in 2016, with a proviso that it would be on the basis of settling our liabilities with the E.U.

All of the 'cock & bull' that CORBYN's trying to insert are kite-flying, because, there is no way that they are acceptable to europe, because they are not compatible with membership of the E.U from any angle & they reflect the referendum result to 'Leave' the E.U.
In addition, CORBYN knows that he would never win an election, based on remaining in the E.U or tied as a vassal state paying dues to them with no say in decisions that would affect us negatively.

Those crying out for A50 revocation, a 'second' referendum, a 'soft-deal', a 'Norway' type deal , are all empty vessels making a lot of noise, but, not making any sense, it's like giving a monkey a piano to play with, a million years worth of noise, then one 'inspirational' moment of harmonics, the trouble with remainers is, the penny never drops-they will not get their way.

[B0ycey]

To say your name is apt @Nonsense is an understatement.

Nonsense -

'leave' is the 'will of the people'.

For a start it was three years ago and Leave lost its majority a long time ago FYI - also may I say it seems to me that Leave loses the little support it has every day too. Nonetheless the march and petition are recent events and are evidence enough to where the will is today BTW and definitely not an election fought with lies.

The petition numbers alone, as you say, do not matter, so, therefore, it was not worthwhile, for the reasons given.

I doubt anyone who signs up to the petition cares whether it is debated in parliament or not. If they did, most people would have stopped at 100,000. People who sign up to it do so to make a statement - so is/was worthwhile. So they have actually achieved the reason why they sign up to it FYI by it reaching an impressive 5 million+. It is also absurd to believe that the message both the march or petition gives will not be heard either. But if it is ignored, the Tories will be punished in the ballot box I have no doubt about that.

'Remain' is not the will of the people, 'BREXIT' is a 'remainer' agenda, the people never voted on 'BREXIT', the question was 'remain' or 'Leave', nothing too difficult there to chew on.

Brexit is short hand for leaving the EU and created by the buffoon Johnson, and not by anyone in the remain camp. It is not a remain agenda and doesn't mean much actually FYI. Nonetheless as I have said many times on here, as a manifesto was not created by the leave campaign, what leaving the EU entails can create many forms - including soft Brexit. Also I doubt even a small percentage that voted Leave did so on a No Deal platform.

The 'deal', now rejected twice, is a 'remainers' attempt at moderating 'Leave', all the government had to do was agree on our immediate liabilities & declare the type of future relationship between us.

None of the above should have been contingent on the success of the other, each issue should have been separately agreed, the 'red lines' are, despite protestations by remainers, integral to the E.U integrity, but, only relevent if a 'deal' is made in respect of customs.

Well the deal has been rejected in parliament twice, but so what? All that means is that May needs to take another approach if she wants to achieve any form of Brexit. And that means either changing her red lines or another referendum.

Remember parliament is sovereign and it is up to May to figure out where consensus lies, not MPs to do that job for her.

A future trade deal could have been started in 2016, with a proviso that it would be on the basis of settling our liabilities with the E.U.

All of the 'cock & bull' that CORBYN's trying to insert are kite-flying, because, there is no way that they are acceptable to europe, because they are not compatible with membership of the E.U from any angle & they reflect the referendum result to 'Leave' the E.U.
In addition, CORBYN knows that he would never win an election, based on remaining in the E.U or tied as a vassal state paying dues to them with no say in decisions that would affect us negatively.

Those crying out for A50 revocation, a 'second' referendum, a 'soft-deal', a 'Norway' type deal , are all empty vessels making a lot of noise, but, not making any sense, it's like giving a monkey a piano to play with, a million years worth of noise, then one 'inspirational' moment of harmonics, the trouble with remainers is, the penny never drops-they will not get their way.

Whether the Public accept soft Brexit or not is irrelevant. Soft Brexit is the only form of Brexit that can pass parliament as things stand - unless a referendum is attached of course. Although I am fully aware Corbyn's CU is Mays deal including workers rights BTW. Although I will say I suspect the only way Corbyn can win an election is to side with remain actually. Corbyn leadership relies on a mainly remain membership FYI - and as I said earlier the voice today is remain throughout the UK so I suspect Labour's manifesto in a hopefully forthcoming election my well include a people's vote on any Brexit deal forged.

[Nonsense]

To say your name is apt @Nonsense is an understatement.



For a start it was three years ago and Leave lost its majority a long time ago FYI - also may I say it seems to me that Leave loses the little support it has every day too. Nonetheless the march and petition are recent events and are evidence enough to where the will is today BTW and definitely not an election fought with lies.



I doubt anyone who signs up to the petition cares whether it is debated in parliament or not. If they did, most people would have stopped at 100,000. People who sign up to it do so to make a statement - so is/was worthwhile. So they have actually achieved the reason why they sign up to it FYI by it reaching an impressive 5 million+. It is also absurd to believe that the message both the march or petition gives will not be heard either. But if it is ignored, the Tories will be punished in the ballot box I have no doubt about that.



Brexit is short hand for leaving the EU and created by the buffoon Johnson, and not by anyone in the remain camp. It is not a remain agenda and doesn't mean much actually FYI. Nonetheless as I have said many times on here, as a manifesto was not created by the leave campaign, what leaving the EU entails can create many forms - including soft Brexit. Also I doubt even a small percentage that voted Leave did so on a No Deal platform.



Well the deal has been rejected in parliament twice, but so what? All that means is that May needs to take another approach if she wants to achieve any form of Brexit. And that means either changing her red lines or another referendum.

Remember parliament is sovereign and it is up to May to figure out where consensus lies, not MPs to do that job for her.



Whether the Public accept soft Brexit or not is irrelevant. Soft Brexit is the only form of Brexit that can pass parliament as things stand - unless a referendum is attached of course. Although I am fully aware Corbyn's CU is Mays deal including workers rights BTW. Although I will say I suspect the only way Corbyn can win an election is to side with remain actually. Corbyn leadership relies on a mainly remain membership FYI - and as I said earlier the voice today is remain throughout the UK so I suspect Labour's manifesto in a hopefully forthcoming election my well include a people's vote on any Brexit deal forged.

A leopard never changes it's spots BOycey & neither will you.

Whatever you post regarding anything about the subject in hand, from 23 June 2016 - the scheduled 29 March 2019 deadline or beyond is just vaporous nonsense devoid of substance- save for....garbage.

As I say BOycey, empty vessels make the most noise & you are one of them.
Get a life BOYcey...we are Leaving like it or not, you too are coming along for the ride...oxy

[Beren]

we are 'Leaving'

Sure, 'Leaving'. Freudian slip perhaps?

[Nonsense]

Sure, 'Leaving'. Freudian slip perhaps?

Nonsense -

corrected.

[Beren]

Nonsense -

corrected.

Freudian slips can't be corrected once they've happened and you shouldn't feel embarrassed by having realised that Brexit has run aground.

[Nonsense]

Freudian slips can't be corrected once they've happened and you shouldn't feel embarrassed by having realised that Brexit has run aground.

It's not 'game over' yet.

I'm not sure if it's the 'Ide's of March' or whether the Chancellor, Phil HAMMOND is on 'something' or not, but, it's not just Theresa MAY that's joined in with the rest of the Westminster lunatics, although she does appoear to be in need of some 'medication',anyway, HAMMOND say's, "I'm not sure there's a majority in parliament in support of a second referendum but it's a perfectly coherent proposition".

From that, I would say he is fully signed up to the rest of the incoherent remainer loonies in that neck of the woods, or maybe he is just ruling himself out of the wooden spoon race as the next P.M.

[Nonsense]

Sorry, must be one of those 'slips' again.

[Beren]

It's not 'game over' yet.

Exactly, and the tide seems to be turning.

[ingliz]

Leaving

I believe so too.

I have just cancelled an order from the UK because I can't be arsed to fart around with import licences, HS Codes, and customs duties.

I can buy the same from an EU country without the hassle.

[B0ycey]

Get a life BOYcey...we are Leaving like it or not, you too are coming along for the ride...oxy

If I am leaving I will do so kicking and screaming. Although really the PM shouldn't worry about me. Sturgeon will no doubt back independence if we just leave without a deal and I suspect she'll have the numbers under hard Brexit too.

Leave really does mean leave. Everyone leaves under Brexit.

[Nonsense]

I believe so too.

I have just cancelled an order from the UK because I can't be arsed to fart around with import licences, HS Codes, and customs duties.

I can buy the same from an EU country without the hassle.

Really, it cuts both ways, if you were in this country & prices were cheaper for the same goods or services, why buy from the E.U?

Not only that, the U.K is better able to compete globally from a lower currency value, thus boosting it's exports, which counter, to some extent, imported inflation.

Every cloud has a silver lining.

[Nonsense]

Exactly, and the tide seems to be turning.

Tides 'ebb & flow', no worries there.

[snapdragon]

Ever heard of the term whistling in the dark?

Why do you people who don't live in the UK want Brexit cancelled?

[Beren]

Ever heard of the term whistling in the dark?

Why do you people who don't live in the UK want Brexit cancelled?

As to myself, I'd like a kind of soft Brexit the most in general, but I'd prefer no Brexit to hard Brexit anytime. However, if the British have changed their mind, let them remain then.

[Nonsense]

If I am leaving I will do so kicking and screaming. Although really the PM shouldn't worry about me. Sturgeon will no doubt back independence if we just leave without a deal and I suspect she'll have the numbers under hard Brexit too.

Leave really does mean leave. Everyone leaves under Brexit.

I am all for Scotland having it's independence, borders, customs controls, tarrifs & passports too.

While we are at it, the same goes for the whole of Ireland too, so let's have a 'double, or triple whammy' by having, as a bonus, the DUP where it belongs, in the context of the whole of Ireland, just a tiny minority group, whose tail-wagging there will no longer affect England as they will, like the SNP,not be sitting in 'our' parliament.

You see, Labour, which introduced devolution, too, became 'devolved', from the status of a national party of the U.K, to the rump of an 'English' political party.

When you consider New Labour's devolution policy, it's difficult understanding their 'remain' posture on europe, which amounts to centralisation of power, culminating into a superstate, which, in this country, they bemoan, albeit on a smaller scale.

[B0ycey]

You may get your wish @Nonsense.

[snapdragon]

As to myself, I'd like a kind of soft Brexit the most in general, but I'd prefer no Brexit to hard Brexit anytime.

I don't see the point of a soft brexit. We might as well stay in.

However, if the British have changed their mind, let them remain then.

Well, exactly. What's it to you?

[Beren]

I don't see the point of a soft brexit. We might as well stay in.

You might as well stay in but soft Brexit could be a compromise.