Quote Originally Posted by Rjk View Post
Well the remain campaign were pointing these things out before the referendum, saying we would either see trade tariffs or have to keep free movement of people.
This was [s] lied about [/s] dismissed time again by the brexit bunch who promised everyone we could have both, making it seem as though there was both a financial and immigration case for brexit.
If people knew they would be paying such a high price for reduced immigration (if that actually happens) I know several people who would have voted differently
The official remain campaign did an awful job of explained the details of issues after an exit.

Passporting and london was discussed rarely if ever, from what I read. And that would have been a major negative of leaving for thousands. If they thought london could be gutted of financial services.

They relied on using emotional arguments. I don't know how many times Remain MP's and celebs wheeled out the argument of being loving and caring.

The remain campaign claim to be the wise ones but their attempt was dire. They resorted to claiming economists were on their side so that gives their powder puff arguments credibility. As if they didn't need to explain themselves properly because of it.

There are far, farrrrrrrrrr more intelligent people that voted leave than on this messageboard. Yet apparently remain voters have intelligence ring fenced for themselves.....

Maybe in 20 years time we'll know if the decision was a poor one. Because positives and negatives can only be compared to how the EU succeeds/fails over a long term period. We'll see.