Happen to think you are taking points that suit you to cobble together a world view that a lot of people agree with. A lot if people just accept what look like cogent arguments if it fits their world view and are too lazy to question.
My prerogative Is not to agree with you - Normally that sort of comment elicits a rabid respone, usually in Capitals.
Had to chuckle the other day when one of my more rabid Brexiteer colleagues was pontificating and said Churchill would have been a complete Brexiteer and on various forums people take the same view. Iād say he was many things but a few instructional minutes online (away from nutter forums) would confirm the opposite.
Again, my prerogative to say and believe the opposite to you.
It is a matter of historical record, in documents referenced, referendums held, and actions taken afterwards.
We share many of the same years on this planet, sir. You and I both should remember the Lib Dems opportunist rage at the Lisbon Treaty being an implementation of the EU Constitution by stealth, and that Nick Clegg, of all people, was offering an in-out referendum.
I genuinely donāt think people appreciate the sea-change in that treaty.
Thatās the problem with democracyā¦ the āpeopleā may want the ābenefitsā of brexit, but everyone also wants to maintain the benefits of staying inā¦ but hey whatever happens with all the economic and trade shite, we still got our country back, and it will be the end of the mullahs and Syrians and stuff for coming over hereā¦
Probably for the best. Mayās Brexit isnāt Brexit.
As Iāve said before, people did know that leaving meant leaving the single market and customs union. They knew this because the supposedly disastrous effects of leaving either were hammered home by Remainās main players.
The REASON it isnāt toast Pap is the poisoned chalice.
Whoever presides over the actual Brexit will become unelectable for a generation.
Everyone is playing the waiting game
