And become the sick man of Europe again like we were before we joined and became strong again?

@@andrewpollock4599 how's that working out for you?

@Louise Rothwell hahaha all the vile 'Remoaners' seem to be running back under their rocks and just like with not joining the Euro currency, voting to leave is turning out to be the best decision we could of made, WITH Brexit Britain can LEAD the way again, I have nothing but disgust for those cretins that bought into 'project fear'

@@andrewpollock4599 Well, wrong again then mate.. still your consistancy is to be admired.

Here fucking here!

and then he whinges about Dominic Cummings!

It's great to see him lose his mind. Him and Tony B.liar can't move to mainland Europe as they would probably end up in the Hague.

NPC 00000001 definitely should be in prison with vile Blair

Soros

Sin doctors are professional liars

Spin doctor is spin for "peddler of lies" the man has no shame.

Mark Sykes courtesy of Peter Hitchins. Used that today on a bunch of EU Libtards with their flags and badges,protesting outside the Post Office this morning.They didn't like that,or my asking them to give my regards to their idol George Soros.Isn't baiting these cretins fun?

M o d

And despite the fact that she herself voted remain, she genuinly respected the referendum outcome. She is a quality politician - she is wasted in the Labour party.

Hey Dumbo how did brexit go

Totally agree

Now now .. I was very complimentary of Carloline Flint despite her being a long way from my political persuasion .. as my old Nan always said 'If you can't say anything nice, say nothing.'

And Caroline was spot on with what she said.

Portillo said that he wanted to go back to the way things were before Britain joined the European Union. No matter how hard he tries it would be very foolish indeed to follow that Pied Piper

He should be Prime Minister...

Wave wrote: hahahaha. Brexiteeres win a referendum, negotiate for 2 years, fail, and then blame remoners and Alistair Campbell. Me: Theresa May is a remainer and Olly Robins who has played a big part is also a remainer. It's called sabotage.... sabotage /ˈsabətɑːʒ/ verb. deliberately destroy, damage, or obstruct (something), especially for political or military advantage. Wave wrote: they don't deliver anything substantial. Me: You don't think getting a referendum and winning it was substantial? And if it isn't, what about those who lost?

What do you expect when their LEADER is a remainer sabateur? As for BJ and JRM, polls have consistently revealed that they are the top 2 favourites to win a leadership election.

Wave wrote: Evidence of her sabotage? Me: You really need evidence of May's blinkered march towards a soft Brexit, which will sabotage the TRUE Brexit that was voted for in the 2016 EU referendum? OK, let me explain... The referendum was binary, there were only TWO choices... 1) Remain, which meant remaining in the EU and ALL of it's institutions, basically staying as we are, i.e. maintaining the status quo. 2) Leave, which is the polar opposite of remain, meant LEAVING the EU and ALL of it's institutions and taking back full control of our money, our laws, our borders, our fishing grounds, our agricultural policy, trade etc..., basically complete sovereignty in every area. How more simple could it be? What the referendum wasn't... Three choices, i.e. remain, hard brexit and soft brexit. The terms hard and soft Brexit, that weren't mentioned AT ALL by either side before the referendum, nor appeared on the ballot paper, were invented by the remain camp shortly after the referendum to try and water down the meaning of Brexit, i.e. to force a compromise if they couldn't scupper and overturn Brexit altogether by getting a second referendum, which was first demanded just days, or maybe even hours after the 2016 referendum result. A soft Brexit is a compromise because the referendum was binary decision, i.e. two choices, fully in or fully out. There was no fuzzy middle of the road compromise at all. There are always winners and losers in a referendum. The leave camp won and the remain camp lost. The winners get what they want and the losers don't get what they want. The referendum wasn't a form of proportional representation, where the winners and losers get to dictate the nature of Brexit depending on their percentage of the result, i.e. leave get 4% more say because they won 4% more of the vote. A binary referendum is an absolutist, winner takes all endeavour with no mandate for compromise. If the remain camp had won by 4%, do you think they would have said to the leave camp, "Aw, bless you, you lost. I know, why don't we compromise. We'll stay in A, B and C, EU institutions you can leave X and Y, EU institutions, just to make you feel better." Of COURSE not, there are complete winners and complete losers in a binary referendum and with no compromise. That is if the result of the referendum is to be FULLY respected. How would you feel if you won a lottery jackpot of £millions, got up the next morning and noticed a queue of people from your front door to the garden gate, right down the street, right across the city and down the MI motorway, literally millions of them and they all started raging about a compromise and saying they because they also took part in the lottery, you should compromise and give them all some of your winnings? Would you cough up? Would the remain camp cough up if they won the lottery jackpot as a syndicate? Of COURSE not. When Theresa May got into 10 Downing Street, not because she was elected by her party, but because one by one, all of the other candidates dropped out, she famously said (paraphrased), "I'm going to deliver on the result of the referendum, Brexit means Brexit and no deal is better than a bad deal. Since then she has sabotaged a TRUE Brexit (see above) by trying to placate both sides through a soft Brexit compromise that wasn't on the ballot paper, which is an impossible task, because the remain camp want to fully remain and the leave camp want to fully leave, i.e. neither camp wants to compromise. That's why her Chequers plan is largely reviled by both sides, not to mention the EU. Now she's pondering on extending the process and/or staying in the Customs Union (an EU institution that we voted to leave) to solve the Irish border issue, so it is claimed, which would prevent the UK forging free trade deals around the world, which was one of the main advantages sought by the the winners of the referendum, the leave camp. So the issue of the Irish border has given May the opportunity to to vie for an extended process and/or remaining as a member of the Customs union, i.e. a soft Brexit extraordinaire. However, the Irish border, where the Republic of Ireland will remain in the Customs Union post Brexit, and Northern Ireland who are leaving aren't is being blown out of all proportion and used by the remain camp (May is a remainer) and the EU as a political pawn in order to thwart the 2016 democratic referendum (read: democracy). The idea is that a hard border should be avoided at all cost to keep all sides happy. Look at the border between France, which is in the Customs Union and Switzerland which isn't... c2.staticflickr.com/2/1949/44584030555_118c363c26_b.jpg Does that look like a hard border to you? Of course not, which shows that a perfectly good model for the Irish border already exists and is obviously acceptable to the EU because it already exists within their rules. And the remain camp and the EU reckon there no solution to the Irish border? What a load of self-serving rubbish. The Irish border is clearly being used by the remain camp and the EU (in tandem) to get a soft Brexit under the radar. I could go on and on and on, but I know that there's a character limit for youtube posts. So Wave, do you STILL need to ask how May is trying to sabotage Brexit, And I mean a TRUE Brexit where we leave the EU and ALL of it's institutions (see above)?

Wave wrote: She's campaigning for her Brexit, you can't call sabotage just because it doesn't align with your idea of Brexit. Me: You clearly don't understand what a binary referendum is and how it works, or you do and are denying it because you couldn't abide the result. If the remain camp had won, we would have remained fully in, right? That means if leave side won, and they did, then we fully leave. How can you not understand such a simple concept? I suspect that you do understand it, but are obfuscating like the remain camp has been doing since the result. The remain camp are the most dishonest bunch of people I've ever come across in my life. Wave wrote: Sabotage would be if she tried to stop us from leaving. Me: No, there are various levels of potential sabotage, a whole spectrum. Brexit in name only (BRINO), a half in, half out scenario, is not fully LEAVING. And I note that after you asking for evidence of May's attempts to sabotage the full Brexit that 17.4 million people voted for and me accommodating you, you've skipped over 99% of it. Too hot to handle? There ARE no such things as a soft and hard Brexit, which were not mentioned AT ALL by either side prior to the result of the 2016 referendum, there is only Brexit. The terms hard and soft Brexit were invented by butt hurt remainers like you who couldn't accept the fact that they LOST.

I wrote: "The winners get what they want and the losers don't get what they want." Wave replied: Sorry mate, but 52% of people didn't all want the same thing, stop pretending to speak for 17.4 million people. Me: Firstly, I'm not your mate. Secondly, the choices on the ballot paper were fully REMAIN or fully LEAVE. The LEAVE vote that WON spoke for the 17.4 million people regardless of what individuals thought. THAT was the result that you should ACCEPT. REMAIN meant fully REMAIN, right? Well then if it DID, then LEAVE meant fully LEAVE. Come on, did REMAIN mean fully REMAIN? Please answer that question rather than ignoring again. It only requires a YES or NO answer, so it should be easy enough for you. Can you image if the remain camp had won? How would you feel if we started saying that they didn't know what they were voting for, so we should have another vote? How would you feel if we started using the terms hard and soft remain in order to water down the result so that we could leave some of the EU institutions while you get to remain in others? You wouldn't tolerate ANY of it would you? Well why should WE tolerate the same thing from you lot? There is a massive amount of hypocrisy in the remain camp, apart from the few honest ones who think, "Well we lost, so just get on with it." You're not one of the honest ones. The remain camp are full of chicanery... chicanery /ʃɪˈkeɪnəri/ noun. the use of deception or subterfuge to achieve one's purpose Here's another helping of it ----> Wave: You have quite a philosophical narrative with absolutes and "polar opposites", that is not the world democratically elected politicians operate in. Me: There's nothing philosophical about what I'm saying at at, it's just common sense. It's the way referendums operate, including the one that was given to us by POLITICIANS to decide whether our future will be IN or OUT of the EU, so yes, it IS how politicians operate. What's happening right here, right now, is that you're being backed into a corner and you have only 2 options, 1) humble yourself and admit that you're wrong and 2) try to fight your way out of the corner by talking yet more deceptive BS. You've clearly decided to go for the latter and I'm seriously embarrassed for you. Wave wrote: There is a lot of doubt. Me: There is no doubt about the result of the referendum to take us OUT of the EU and that's all that matters in this scenario. Wave wrote: Imagine Theresa May looking at that referendum and trying to decide what most people voted for Me: But she doesn't HAVE to do that and SHOULDN'T do that. The mandate from the referendum is what is important to deliver on, which was to fully LEAVE, if the vote to remain was to fully REMAIN. So she doesn't have to be a clairvoyant and decide what most people voted for, it's MUCH easier than that, she simply needs to act upon what they ACTUALLY vote for in a binary referendum, which was to fully LEAVE, if the vote to remain was to fully REMAIN. Wave: people would have hated her if she put the country through it again so she does the next best thing. A general election for a Brexit mandate and then interprets the rest. Wave: Have you been asleep, only that has already happened in the recent snap general election where 85% of voters voted for parties that had LEAVE in their manifestos and the Lib Dems who wanted to stop Brexit did really badly. The leave camp has won not ONE, but THREE votes up to now, 1) the EU referendum, 2) the parliamentary vote forced by Gina Miller in court hoping it might thwart Brexit, the parliamentary vote on whether or not to invoke Article 50, which would take us out of the EU. MP's voted by a massive majority (498 votes to 114, or a majority of 384) to invoke Article 50 to take us out of the EU, which enshrined it in UK law (so thanks for that Gina Miller) and 3) a general election where 85% of voters voted for parties with leaving the EU in their manifestos. So you're not trying to overturn just ONE democratic vote, but THREE. And are you saying that the 498 MP's who voted to invoke Article 50, which takes us out of the EU didn't know what they were voting for? Wave: She's just as bad as you trying to speak for the whole country. Me: She shouldn't speak for the whole country just as I don't speak for the whole country. I speak for the winners of the referendum, just as she should speak for the winners of the referendum. It's arch remainer May being drawn into a compromise that wasn't on the ballot paper by lobbying remainers and trying to please both sides (the whole country) that has turned the negotiations into such a mess when the referendum was a simple binary choice. Wave wrote: The only thing that we can agree on is that there is too much uncertainty and chaos in the government Me: The chaos has been caused by remainers, who don't accept the referendum result, working together in tandem with the EU to frustrate and thwart the result of the referendum at every turn, which has resulted in the negotiations being a complete mess. It's a REMAINER mess. The blatant subversiveness on the part of the remain camp and the EU has significantly weakened May's negotiating hand, which is detrimental to the country as a whole, not to mention trust in the political process and democracy itself. Wave wrote: and that the best way of getting out of it is to go back to the people. Me: And that's the REASON that the remain camp, who don't accept the referendum result, working together in tandem with the EU to frustrate and thwart the result of the referendum at every turn, which has resulted in the negotiations being a complete mess, i.e. to force another vote in an attempt to reverse the referendum result. It's as PLAIN as day. Anyway, let me go back to a question I asked earlier seeing that I've been methodically answering ALL of your questions and points... Give me a simple YES or NO answer to this question ~ *DID THE CHOICE TO REMAIN IN THE EU ON THE REFERENDUM BALLOT PAPER MEAN FULLY REMAINING IN THE EU AND ALL OF IT'S INSTITUTIONS?* *YES or NO?*

Austen J That'll be the George Soros Appreciation and Dependency Society?

no thanks, tories are destroying this country.

Donald Derp 😂😂😂😂 and labour will save us ?!!! Yeh and pigs can fly !!

Donald Derp - and labour haven't been ? and would do again if they got the chance. they are all useless on both sides but Portillo has always been a decent individual

Labour are very dangerous

Hear hear. The remainians need to take full responsibility for the rotten deal they have cobbled together and the fact they didnt plan from the very beginning for wto. David Cameron explained quite clearly that if we voted leave we would be out of the ecj, the customs union and the single market. It seems that the politicians either weren't listening or didnt want that outcome. The remainians have done everything to get a half in half out deal which isnt what we were told a vote to leave would mean. As for the so called peoples vote ( the people have already voted) David Cameron explained, clearly again, we were under no illusion, that there would only be one vote it would be final and the government would get on with the instruction from the British people. As for Crime Minister Teresa May if her mouth is moving shes telling lies.The remainians need to take a look at the Lisbon Treaty as what is coming down the road from the eu superstate does not make pleasant reading. Are these words more lies from Teresa May '"Brexit means brexit. No deals better than a bad deal" said repeatedly since she took office. There never should have been a remainian over such an important matter but one consolation they cant blame the leave side ministers for where we find ourself now, the blame is squarely on the shoulders of the remainians.

Keith Baldock Any plan that can’t survive dissent is a plan that never would’ve worked in the first place.

Interesting that Portillo, a grammar school boy, supported Brexit, and so did Lord King, ex Bank of England Governor, who was also a grammar school boy. People who start at the bottom have common sense.

I expect he’s already had Blair’s haggis in his mouth!

Writing in 2021. Wouldn’t worry about it too much.

As every day passes it becomes more and more apparent that UKIP is the only solution to Britain's problems not just where the E U is concerned but in general.

"He's a real nowhere man, sitting in his nowhere land, making all his nowhere plans, for nobody......."

Most people do

Totally agree - I'm in Huddersfield and I wish she was my MP instead of Remoaner Barry Sheerman. She's actually listened and learned something from the referendum, one of the few that have.

Daniel Ward, how did Huddersfield vote if you don't mind me asking? I've just read this and can see why you might be unhappy with Sheerman... www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-remain-voters-better-educated-labour-mp-barry-sheerman-huddersfield-yougov-facts-leave-a8027121.html Part of that is based on higher votes for remain in university cities, which supposedly proves that remainers are more intelligent, but I reckon it's because universities are full of globalist propaganda. Research has shown that intelligent people are just as susceptible to propaganda as less intelligent people because it enters the psyche subliminally, thus bypassing the intellect.

No time for Labour usually but I was very impressed by her in general ... one to watch

Anti Gunman, who are you asking? If it's me (the OP), I voted labour for a long time, when I was younger and lacked sense, but had to step away when they went overly Marxist under J Corbyn. So then I voted for UKIP because I wanted to leave the EU and in the last snap election, like many other UKIP voters I voted Tory because I though May had the best chance of winning the election and delivering Brexit. How wrong I was :o( because T May has done little but try and get a BRINO (Brexit in name only) under the radar. I guess you could say that I'm a roving political orphan at the moment. It bugs me when you can't vote for who you want because you have to vote for another party that has the best chance of winning and delivering on a particular thing you want.

I vote for whoever I think will deliver what I want regardless of who they are. Don't ALL people vote that way? Surely there aren't people vote for parties that they don't believe will deliver what they want.

You stupid clowns 😂

Nothing comes easy in life, but this is a paid traitor and as a traitor he should be punished.

Jonathan Vogel It’s a general election, believe it or not. They’re distinct thing.

@@Noscetum yep , but they are both democracy and therefore very similar , but you cant see it that way

Hahahahahaha you fell for all the lies now look at your country swimming in your own shit 😂