How would you vote if

[Fatasfook]

We were given the peoples vote with a choice of -

Deal
No deal
Remain

I’m Remain

I disagreed with the first vote so did not participate

I disagree even more with a 2nd one

Remain. Voting for a no deal brexit would be spectacularly fucking stupid. It just doesn't make sense to vote for such uncertainty and to do so is so irresponsible.

Remain

@Elfinablender I meant on the premise of the OP's question that was a three question vote with two leave options.

@Ethel80 No-one will give us the option of voting for a no-deal Brexit.

Yeah, I know. I think I got distracted in my own reply . I was saying it only splits the vote if anyone is actually interested in May's deal. And outside of Westminster, people seem to only be interested in May's deal as a compromise if they cannot get what they want - which is either leave or remain, which I think people would exclusively choose given the three options.

Hopefully, I'm wrong. I might be in a pessimistic rut.

@badlydrawnperson It was one of the options in the OP which is what I'm responding to.

No-one will give us the option of voting for a no-deal Brexit.

It wont need to, if the VONC fails tonight which its expected to, no deal is the default as there is no majority for any other type of deal.

No major party wants a second ref asthe polling is still within margin of error at about 50/50.

To call a second ref Remain would need to change their tune and be realistic as well as Leave.

The only thing to do is to revoke Art 50, but again this comes with other problems.

I want to say 'no deal' as I know it'll likely give a few posters a triggering.

Remain, though.

It'll clearly never happen with an anorak-wearing, sneaky, pro-Brexit cunt leading the "opposition".

Remain

Remain.

The thing is, the 'deal' hasn't actually been negotiated yet...this is about the WA; do we leave the EU, paying them billions and with the possibility of being parked in the backstop until they see fit to let us out; subject to ECJ rulings under the terms of the backstop and the Withdrawal agreement; trying to negotiate an FTA with them with the outcome already set in Commission minds: 'Deputy Chief negotiator at the European Commission Sabine Weyand has warned the European Union will still have control over the customs union after the UK leaves on March 30, 2019. She has said on the proposed Brexit “deal”: "This requires the customs union as the basis of the future relationship...They must align their rules but EU will retain all the controls. They apply the same rules. UK wants a lot more from future relationship, so EU retains its leverage" Ms Weyand added Britain “would have to swallow a link between access to products and fisheries in future agreements”. ..or do we just leave and then negotiate an FTA without paying over the £39 billion, which HoL legal bods don't think we should have to pay?

No WA for me; I think we should leave and then negotiate an FTA.

No deal.
Unfortunately the vast majority of academic economists are unable to separate their own political views from their work and it is quite easy to manipulate economic statistics to show whatever you want in many cases as can be seen by opposing research where the political views of economists are more divided.

Remain!!!!

@snurguzelly it's a bit mean, but I did have a grin at your description of Corbyn.

Why do you think the vast majority of academics want remain? Because of their work and what they have found in their stats! You have that the wrong way round.

"Why do you think the vast majority of academics want remain?"

There is an overwhelming left-leaning bent amongst academics. This is undeniable.

Remain

We won't be contrinuting under the WA, so one of your points is out there.

AS for "parked in the backstop till they see fit to let us out" well the backstop is there only if a deal is not negotiated in time, and has to have both parties agreeing to its end, not just the UK.

We want to continue under the WA in the Customs union, which means that we need to follow ECJ rulings. We can choose not to once we the period of the WA is agreed, but most likely we are going to still follow them. Without the WA we are out of the customs union and the lorries are queuing at Dover.

Funnily enough, in the trade deal with the EU the UK is going to be a rule taker, as it will be with the US, and any other trade bloc. Also any trade deal will have a court of arbitration that will cover much the same.

"No WA for me; I think we should leave and then negotiate an FTA"

I'm not sure you understand the implications.

Or just don't care cause it doesn't effect you.

"Unfortunately the vast majority of academic economists are unable to separate their own political views from their work and it is quite easy to manipulate economic statistics to show whatever you want in many cases as can be seen by opposing research where the political views of economists are more divided."

Except those working for banks and many other institutions come up with the same results.

Funny that the only ones backing no deal are Minford and the ultra right wing and neo liberal IEA.

Except those working for banks and many other institutions come up with the same results

This is the same banks that said it would be a disaster to not join the euro, and the same banks that said a Corbyn government would have a negative impact on GDP.

Funny that the only ones backing no deal are Minford and the ultra right wing and neo liberal IEA.

Ah, I see you think neo liberal is an evil thing, and still trying to square that with bein pro EU

Remain.

Those who are voting for no deal, id love to know your reasons for your choice?

No deal