Farage on Marr

[Chief crazy horse]

I agree with Prop J a confirmatory vote on the 3 main options: a soft leave deal like May’s or whatever she can agree with Labour, crash out with no deal, or remain (but keep steering clear of further political federalism), with a STV to establish 2nd choice, is the best way out of this mess. And I wasn’t a remain voter either.

I'm all up for throwing it back to the thickies but this three way vote clearly isn't fair.

It obviously needs to be structured some other way.

So according to you, anyone who does not agree with you is a ''Thicky''
A very autocratic and smug viewpoint indeed which is far removed from the aims of the founders of the Labour party which was formed to represent the interests and needs of the many working class people of Britain.

Like I've always said they're hypercrites, and just can't see it.

[CreamofSumYungGai]

Why is it not fair?

Oh come on, it clearly splits the Leave vote.

Ok, have 4 options then, even it up.

Leave with no deal
Leave with a deal
Remain
Don't remain

Sorted it.

[CreamofSumYungGai]

Why is it not fair?

Oh come on, it clearly splits the Leave vote.

No it doesn't. Slacker is referencing the sensible use of a STV.

I didn’t know what STV meant but having googled it yep, slackers proposal gets my votes.

[Max B Gold]

Paying the EU between £39bn and £60bn and signing a treaty, legally binding in international law, drafted by French lawyers on behalf of the European Union which:

• incarcerates the UK in the Customs Union (and therefore unable to agree its own deals with the rest of the World);
  
  enshrines in law the UK's "associate membership" of the European Union, therefore utterly compromising the UK's sovereignty;
  
  creates a border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, therefore destroying the United Kingdom (the EU's forfeit for having the temerity to leave);
  
  obliges British police to arrest people deemed to have committed "political offences" (note the earlier observation of an European Court of Justice's Advocate General that "Criticism of the EU is akin to blasphemy");
  
  binds the UK to all future legislation of the ECJ;
  
  prevents any future UK attempt to renounce the Treaty;
  
  permanently relinquishes control of the UK's tax policy and agricultural subsidies (with fishing rights still to be determined);
  
  establishes "participating status" on the UK to make it liable for any future bail-outs;
  
  permits the ECJ and European Commission to determine, without discussion or agreement, the amounts the UK would need to pay each of the EU bodies which the Treaty would commit the UK to joining;
  
  grants preferential employment treatment to EU members states' citizens over all other countries;
  
  obliges the UK to fund and provide armed service personnel to any future military engagements the EU embarks upon;
  
  commits the UK to providing "sensitive information" about its citizens to a central EU database, and,
  
  worryingly, as stated in Article 18 of the Protocol: “If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate measures.” Therefore, in the event of any kind of disturbance, the EU has the right to act unilaterally in any way it sees fit

is not leaving the European Union.

It all sounds very complicated. Can't we just stay in?

If we stay in a proportion of that would probably still apply to us.

Fair enough. Can we just pick the bits we like and leave the rest?