Nuts EU Referendum - How will you be voting?

This makes me think Breaders and Bonce are the same

Copper Dragon wrote:

xmiles wrote:What abuse?

If you are happy supporting Farage and co and read the Daily Mail that's up to you.

I didn't realise that there were a third and fourth option on the ballot paper.

The ballot paper I filled in only had remain or leave the EU on it and not a box for Farage or if you read the Daily Mail or not.

Everyone who voted Brexit lined themselves up with some very unpleasant politicians and some very nasty newspapers and rejected the advice of almost all experts. Since we live in a free country they are entitled to do that. I just wonder if some of these voters actually understand what they have voted for. Look at the videos of idiots thinking their protest votes wouldn't count and now worried about the consequences.

Personally I cannot believe that Farage, Boris, the Sun and the Daily Mail have the interests of ordinary people at heart.

BoltonTillIDie wrote:This makes me think Breaders and Bonce are the same

I thought the same once Boncey posted.

karlypants wrote:

BoltonTillIDie wrote:This makes me think Breaders and Bonce are the same

I thought the same once Boncey posted.

Why would you think that? Getting a bit paranoid I think.

From the guardians comments section. Does this have a ring of truth or is it all bollocks? Who knows? Time will tell. 

If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.

They will find a way to stop the wishes of the majority of the British people. 

the wheels are already motion. Book it.

Hearing that Northend Ireland want to replay yesterday's match as they only lost by 1 goal.

They really do hate the electorate.

Why has Breadman been banned?

Barb Dwyer wrote:Why has Breadman been banned?

Well the vote was for him to remain or leave Bolton Nuts.

And leave won by 1.2 million votes.

Barb Dwyer wrote:Why has Breadman been banned?

He got nasty whilst being drunk and disorderly.

Barb Dwyer wrote:Why has Breadman been banned?

Karly's gone a bit Kim Jong Un and is no longer tolerating criticism.

All hail the great leader!

Barb Dwyer wrote:Why has Breadman been banned?

I didn't know he had.

The banning policy of Nuts is that anyone in the back office can ban people for 24 hours in order to 'cool' a situation down.

If they think a longer ban is needed they need to seek the agreement from the remainder of the back office.

I can only assume Bread had somehow crossed a line (being to personal about a mods family perhaps?) and has been given a small period of time let things settle.

After a bit of quick digging I now note that the last time he was on was yesterday evening with his 'Thai wife' comment - so I clearly missed his banning - as I've been on Nuts since that time.

Seeing it is now another day and no one has asked for more than the notional 24 hour ban I will go and unban him right away.

Just for the record although I had somehow missed this banning I can fully understand the reason for it due I assume to the personal family remark.

I have said before on Nuts that I have a daughter who is at university and I sometimes refer to her in relationship to her generation and what the norm is now compared to what mine was some decades before.  I have also said that any references to her that anyone ever made in any attempt to demean, or insult her would result in an instant ban.

Abuse me all you like but not my family.

So if what seems as happened here I can fully see why a ban was made.

I think most people will accept that as reasonable I think.

I've been accused of being Breadman. Outrageous.

I demand an apology.

I'd ban him for 12 months, so yer, I think you've been reasonable with the nasty piece of work.

About time golden balls got his comeuppance

Boggersbelief wrote:About time golden balls got his comeuppance

We're out of the EU, Cameron has resigned and Breadman's been banned, I'm off to buy a lottery ticket.

xmiles wrote:What abuse?

If you are happy supporting Farage and co and read the Daily Mail that's up to you.

Don't be childish