Why would he answer a massive "if..." hypothetical question? It's like being asked would you veto Leeds United being taken over by a Sheikh if you could. What's the point in the question?Cameron ducked the Turkey question. Why if they are not going to join soon are we sending huge sums to fund their progress. Truth is its a bribe to get them to stem Syrian refugees so why wouldn't he say so. Disingenuous.
The corrupt bitch has the audacity to label those that want to leave the EU as narrow minded.Arrogant bastards.Looks like Christine Lagarde, head of the IMF who has spent so much time urging us to stay in the EU, is going to stand trial for conspiracy to commit a $400m fraud.
The EU - the fraudster's friend.
He did. He said numerous times "do not vote for exit on the lie of Turkey imminently joining the EU because it's just not going to happen, they have to have 35 things in place to join and so far they've got ONE, at this rate it'll be the year 3000 by the time they join"He had a chance to put this to bed once and for all.... I'd be asking why he never took that chance.
So why not answer the question? Not voting for Turkey and exercising a veto are very different.
So I ask again WHY could he not simply say, if it came to the vote whilst I'm in office I will Veto it? Whether it's going to happen or not is irrelevant he was asked if he would veto it IF it did happen and the wouldn't say no.He did. He said numerous times "do not vote for exit on the lie of Turkey imminently joining the EU because it's just not going to happen, they have to have 35 things in place to join and so far they've got ONE, at this rate it'll be the year 3000 by the time they join"
Cheers Tim, whilst it's not important on some people's mind, it is very important in the whole scheme of things.Fair enough BigJoe.
Dave was playing his international politics and trying to keep a few audiences happy.
It was one of numerous unneeded and pointless questions and comments from the audience. Don't answer "if"s and "but"s talk about "when"s,So I ask again WHY could he not simply say, if it came to the vote whilst I'm in office I will Veto it? Whether it's going to happen or not is irrelevant he was asked if he would veto it IF it did happen and the wouldn't say no.
All the more confusing why he just didn't kill the question dead by saying YES if it's proposed that Turkey join the EU whilst I'm PM I will veto it. Beyond that I can't comment. Move on. He didn't and I think there a reason behind that failure to commit.It was one of numerous unneeded and pointless questions and comments from the audience. Don't answer "if"s and "but"s talk about "when"s,
In the context of a 45minute programme about the EU referendum, he was talking about the points that will be voted on, he kept repeating those points even in answer to questions unrelated. He was trying to get the country to understand those main points. Not answer daft "if" questions that'll never happen
He had a chance to put this to bed once and for all.... I'd be asking why he never took that chance.
All the more confusing why he just didn't kill the question dead by saying YES if it's proposed that Turkry join the EU whilst I'm PM I will veto it. Beyond that I can't comment. Move on. He didn't and I think there a reason behind that.
By definition you don't get "1000 percent". Stating otherwise is moronic.That's how I look at it, if we was not a member would I vote to join? 1000% no
Bang on.As I say, big fan of economic migration. If people lose jobs to those that have moved 1,000 miles to a strange country then they need to look at themselves. Not those coming to do the jobs they see as below them.
I think it maybe because it was another opportunity to say "don't vote to make this country worse off economically by leaving the EU" and make it sound different by adding a different ending "by falling for the lie that Turkey is about to join the EU".All the more confusing why he just didn't kill the question dead by saying YES if it's proposed that Turkry join the EU whilst I'm PM I will veto it. Beyond that I can't comment. Move on. He didn't and I think there a reason behind that.
They do. Those cunts trying to build a better life for your kids are fighting the good fight.Well that was rather my point ..... no-one has a Scoobie's. The only thing for sure is that there will be uncertainty until things become more, well, certain and that will have a negative impact. After that no-one can make sensible predictions because there are too many variables. So it's a question of an individual's principles vs an unquantifiable short term cost. You want to be more integrated into Europe, vote Remain. You don't, vote Leave. Basically, vote how the hell you want. Forget all the other crap. It's just noise.
And don't listen to any twats here or anywhere else that think they know better than you. Because they don't.
So if they manage to change a b c d e f g h and i and work with ys on j k l m n o and q he could vote them in? In which case he says no I cannot say I won't veto them. The public want clarity, he had a chance to deliver it and failed miserably and many people across the UK will have seen that.I think it maybe because it was another opportunity to say "don't vote to make this country worse off economically by leaving the EU" and make it sound different by adding a different ending "by falling for the lie that Turkey is about to join the EU".
Plus his answer might not have been "yes" or "no" it would be a lengthy "well if they managed to change a b c d e f g h and i and work with us on j k l m n o and q we may well have a situation where I may not veto that, but then if they carried on with r s t u v w y and z then it may well be a no".
Things are never a simple yes or no in politics and you can't say "I don't know" because the public won't have it. And a 45minute programme on the EU referendum isn't the place to talk about a lengthy Turkey debate
Bang on.
As I've said, I don't like him and I'm not a Tory voter but he didn't fail miserably. I think he answered that question in exactly the right way.So if they manage to change a b c d e f g h and i and work with ys on j k l m n o and q he could vote them in? In which case he says no I cannot say I won't veto them. The public want clarity, he had a chance to deliver it and failed miserably and many people across the UK will have seen that.
Fair enough you're happy with the answer, I think he failed to clarify the situation and I reckon many of the millions viewing will have seen ut that way, which I suppose is good for the Brexit campaign.As I've said, I don't like him and I'm not a Tory voter but he didn't fail miserably. I think he answered that question in exactly the right way.
It wasn't a good question and it didn't need answering.
And what about the rest of the uk voters wanting to remain??So if they manage to change a b c d e f g h and i and work with ys on j k l m n o and q he could vote them in? In which case he says no I cannot say I won't veto them. The public want clarity, he had a chance to deliver it and failed miserably and many people across the UK will have seen that.