My constituency had an LD MP from 1997-2015 and voted remain. We have a Brexiteer Tory MP, so I don't fancy her chances of keeping her seat unless there's a sea change in public opinion between and the GE.

Jesus......How many more times.....We have had a whole thread about this. Try to guess why the thread ended suddenly.....

All your link shows is that Andrew Neil has not done his research.
Which of my 3 paragraphs (Patterson....Hannan.....Farage) do you disagree with?

It's a shame the Liberal Anti Democrats weren't so viceferous about putting a stop to raising student tuition fees when in coalition with the Tories back in 2010.

If so, they might have a double figure number of MPs in parliament today!

There was no 'destruction' of Clegg, and even AN said later in the show that he felt Clegg had 'held his own'. In fact, the erstwhile LD leader had clearly anticipated Neil's questions and was more than capable of addressing them.

He made the perfectly reasonable point that Leave and Remain proponents prior to the referendum would have said anything to persuade/cajole (take your pick) Joe Public to take their side, just as happens in any such vote. But crucially, the view that a vote for 'Out' would have meant leaving the single market was expressed primarily on programmes like Sunday Politics to the tiny minority of the electorate that would have been watching them.

Even if some of the relevant people had made similar claims in the national TV debates on the BBC or Sky or wherever, it was never going to be properly debated in such a forum. As a consequence, Clegg has a point when he insists this view wasn't widely discussed at the time. He says it wasn't written down in any official document which, if true, further bolsters his argument. If it wasn't even included in the famous 'leaflet', then you've got to wonder why not.

However, because it WAS said by some of the Remain proponents at various points, the Brexit raindrops view it as ammunition against Clegg's position. Is it possible that both sides have a point?...

Personally and I am not alone get really sick and tired of a politician not answering questions and as happened on the Daily Politics totally disregard the fact that the major leading campaigners for the Leave campaign said over and over again that leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market. Tim Farron would not acknowledge these points Andrew Neil was putting.

Perhaps instead we should have Andrew Neil, Adam Bolton, Peston or anyone for that matter when they have a politician on and they refuse to answer the question then just turn and say thank you but as you are not prepared to answer the questions the public want to know then you should just leave now and answer the public directly at the next surgery or election.

Everyone including Tim Farron is entitled to their view and quite right to defend that view but to ignore the facts is just rude and not worth listening to.

My name is not Jesus, but I guess it's because you lost the argument.


All 3 of them.

Once again, I invite others to watch the videos make their own minds up ...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UHzmCHcM7cA

Put up or shut up!
(I am guessing it will be the latter)

Start with Patterson.
What was his position on membership of the single market.....before we voted?

I suspect many minds are made up already, regardless of the clip.

I'm not sure why I should waste my time, spoon feeding you information, as you'll only turn a blind eye to it anyway, but here goes ...

https://youtu.be/UHzmCHcM7cA?t=4m22s

You tell us?

This is extremely amusing.

This is the same clip you have already posted.....starting at a different point.
This is the same clip that I have already commented on.

My comment was: Andrew Neil has not done his research.

Andrew Neil has assumed that Patterson was not talking about Membership when a bit of research (either by Neil or by you) would have quickly shown Patterson saying, before the referendum, that we will have prosperity as members of the single market.....after we leave.

How would I know that?

Oh....You want me to guess??
OK.

Posters on that thread are unwilling to apologise to the forum member (not me) who pointed out as early as page 4, that there was a serious problem with Andrews Neil's position....and had established that without even needing to watch the clip.......

"Car-crash" video indeed.

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showt...2190008&page=8

What?


What again?... I only asked you to tell me why you thought the thread ended 'suddenly'.

And once again your question would have to be directed at posters in that thread who suddenly became shy of the topic......

And in the meantime.....I have furnished you with my best guess.

You said in response to another FM, "Why do you guess the thread ended suddenly?" (which incidentally is how all threads end). I asked you to tell us why you thought so. Now your telling me I should direct my question specifically to you to the other FMs in the other thread. I do not see how asking the other FMs why Landis thinks the thread ended suddenly would asnwer my question.

You have furnished us with your best guess, thank you. It is all I ever asked. The thread makes an interesting re-read to. Full of nonsense from the OPs clip right through to the very end.

My best guess is that they grew bored talking to a brick wall.

So you are conceding then?
No need for the Daniel Hannan clip?

Yes Because, even after 3 attempts, you don't seem to able to grasp that it answers your point, even if I point you in the direction of the exact point that answers your question.

Yes, I'm conceding that trying to reason with a brick wall is pointless. I couldn't really care less whether you can accept what is staring you in the face or not. In the bigger scheme, your opinion isn't important. Maybe some other people, who aren't so blinkered, may have watched the clip and seen you're talking a load of codswallop though.

No it doesn't answer any points.
Andrew Neil does not have to guess if Patterson was talking about leaving the single market or leaving membership of the single market.

He doesn't have to guess because:
1. He has researchers to check what Patterson was saying between the General Election and the Referendum,
2. He is sitting right in front of a guy who has been researching the topic for the past year.

But he guessed......

I'll take his educated guess, over yours, any day.

Nope.
The purpose of debate is to establish who is talking a load of codswallop.
There are 3 hurdles in this forum sub-topic and you have just failed the first one.

Nick Clegg was right. Leave were all over the place before the referendum and significant Leave campaigners were talking about staying in the Single Market. Like Norway.

Okay, put your money where your mouth is.

I've seen plenty of cases of people telling us leaving the EU meant leaving the single market, but you say the campaign was all over the place.

Links to campaigners suggesting we leave the EU but stay members of the single market please?

You can say the exact same thing about remain, there were those that wanted the status quo and those that wanted reforms.

Yes but......you have guessed wrong.

"There are various options which can deliver prosperity, increase jobs … which is as members of the single market…It isn’t either remain in the European Union or leap into the dark. There are other options.
We would under any sane solution continue very active membership of the market.”
Owen Patterson. Radio 4 Today Programme. 23 May 2015