But you present no reason here - only opinions informed by decades of eurosceptic British sentiment. Most of what you write simply isn't true at all, or the world viewed through a fun-house mirror - all distorted.
A) It's not a strawman - it's official UK government policy these days.
And before it became that, it's been the stance of the eurosceptics in Britain for decades.
Every single EU decision that doesn't end exactly like these people have wanted has been decried as some huge injustice to Britain - there have been no understanding what so ever that no nation in a cooperation with 27 others can get it's wish on every single topic.
"I'm saying the EU should negotiate responsibly to get the best terms for its subjects."
And I've told you the best terms for the other member nations is obviously NOT what you or other Brexiter's wish the terms would be.
You're seeing the question from a purely UK-centric perspective, while at the same time arguing that what would be best for Britain would also be best for all other member nations - but it OBVIOUSLY wouldn't!
It's ridiculous that Brexiter's even argue this as the entire reason for any negotiation is obviously always that the different sides has DIFFERING interests!
"Which is not deliberately being obstructive and seeking to bugger Britain about largely for the sake of it apparently."
But the EU isn't being "obstructive" - that would be stalling the negotiations, like the May-government has repeatedly done because they haven't been able to get their act together.
The EU was ready to negotiate long before Britain was and have actively tried to get Britain to speed up the process on many occasions.
What you call "obstructive" and "seeking to bugger Britain about largely for the sake of it" is instead something completely different - it's that the EU negotiators simply aren't giving Britain what she wants and the Brexiter's promised you she would get in the negotiations.
But that's because the EU has a much stronger hand in the negotiations and she doesn't need to give Britain all those concessions you where led to believe she would get.
I know the Brexiter's told you otherwise, but Britain need the EU a hell of a lot more then the rest of Europe needs Britain. I know, I know - that's not at all what you've been told and believe - but that's simply the truth.
Otherwise Britain would obviously be able to dictate the negotiations - like the Brexiter's told you she would. But that isn't happening - now is it?
Germany didn't come crawling on it's knees, desperate to sell it's cars to you, like the Brexiter's promised - now did she?
Nor did Italy or France or any other EU member.
Because it's actually NOT in their best interest to hand Britain everything she asks for, just because they're desperate to keep access to the British market, like the Brexiter's told you.
"Especially since that route is going to cost the EU and its people a lot"
Yes, it will cost them some. But it will cost Britain a hell of a lot more - which means the EU certainly won't blink first in the negotiations.
Also - and much more importantly, and as I've told you repeatedly - the EU actually CAN'T give Britain what the Brexiter's promised you, because we don't live in their fantasy world where only Britain's and the EU's bilateral relation matters.
In the real world, the EU has relations with the rest of the world as well, and it simply CAN'T give Britain a much better deal then anyone else is getting - as that would lead to conflicts with all those other nations.
Now I know you and the other Brexiter's don't give a fig about the EU's situation - but ignoring your negotiating partners situation and demanding the clearly impossible from him will not actually give you more in the real world.
It only makes the Brexiter's demands seem detached from reality and the people arguing for them ridiculous.
Which was all good and well as long as it was internal UK politics.
Farage, Gove and Johnson could promise the British public the moon and anything below it without any real consequences - but it's always been a pipe-dream to ever achieve all of that in negotiations with the EU.
Which, again, EVERYONE that wasn't a Brexit campaigner told you long before the referendum.
"I notice you avoided the points I raised here about why an hostile settlement is a bad result for the EU so I don't expect you to respond to them now but that does make them any less hostile."
And I've told you repeatedly that what you now call a "hostile settlement" actually isn't by far the worst result for the EU.
The EU would much rather lose access to the British markets (if it ever came to that) then it would see their relations with the rest of the world outside the EU deteriorate, because it gives Britain better terms then anyone else.
It's such incredible hubris by the Brexiter's to believe that little Britain would be a more important trading partner for the EU then THE REST OF THE WORLD - but still you people keep making that assumption.
B). I've never neither thought, nor claimed, that you where "brainwashed by the right wing press" - what I've said and stand by is that you'll clearly deluded by the eurosceptic propaganda in Britain.
As far as I know that comes mainly from Ukip, Tory back-benchers and the gutter press - of which I guess most are on the right-wing.
But as far as I know, that sentiment in Britain isn't as much right-wing as it's a populist sentiment. It's just blaming someone else for all your countries problems and offering nonsensical "solutions" to complicated problems. In this case the basic premise that "If we just leave the EU, everything will instantly become much better".
Regarding the BBC, it seems their bias is actually worse then I thought, when they run obvious anti-Labour smears like this and then refuse to even acknowledge their bias or apologize for it:
When they photoshop the leader of the main opposition party to make him look like a Soviet stooge, how impartial can anyone expect them to be on the issue of Brexit?
C). Actually I don't.
The imperialist party in the Gibraltar conflict is obviously Britain, who has occupied a piece of Spain for centuries - not Spain who wish to see their land returned to them.
Your talk of "imperialism" is ridiculous considering the history of the situation, and makes me wonder if you label Ghandi an imperialist as well, for wanting to see his nation regain independence from British rule?
Regarding the wish of the people of Gibraltar that's obviously important and the EU obviously wouldn't back any decision that's not supported by the people who live there.
But with Britain and Gibraltar leaving the EU they obviously no longer can expect to regain the benefits they had as members to automatically continue.
In the referendum on Brexit, every political party and every politician in the Gibraltar parliament supported the remain side, and that side won a whopping 96% of the popular vote.
Thus we'll just have to wait and see what the population of Gibraltar prefers in the long run - remaining British subjects outside the EU, or becoming Spanish and rejoining the EU.
D). Well Britain have been a member of the EEC/EU for many decades now and I can't say I know for sure how things looked way back when.
But I do know that today, many pro-Brexiter's you find online have absolutely no clue about the realities - because the promoters of Brexit are putting out deliberately misleading statistics.
One favorite trick of theirs is talking about the amount Britain pays to the EU, or it's net contribution, in ABSOLUTE NUMBERS.
Well then obviously, Britain should be amongst the top 2-3 payers, as she's amongst the top 2-3 economies of the EU and the nation with the third largest population in the EU.
So saying she pays a lot more then most other countries in ABSOLUTE NUMBERS says virtually nothing.
Instead, you always have to compare stats like these between nation in PER CAPITA, that is per citizen of the nation.
And looked at the numbers that way, Britain is in fact only the eight largest net contributor, per capita, in the EU.
So yes - Britain is still a net contributor, which all nations certainly aren't - but she's not by far the only or one of very few. Her net contribution per capita is smaller then both Germany and France (as it should be, as she's smaller then them in economy and population size). But she's in fact also contributing less in net contribution then several much smaller nations with much smaller economies.
So it's not like Britain had a worse deal then most other rich, western European, nations. If anything, she actually had a slightly better one - considering her large population and economy.
"My point however is the desire for the subsidy to continue for the foreseeable future despite the UK no longer being in the EU."
The EU has never ever expressed any such desire.
Instead, with Britain leaving she'd be treated just like any other non-member and she will instead have to pay for the access that she wants in the future - just like Norway and Switzerland does today, for instance.
That's not the full EU membership and the fees are lower - but on the other hand you get no subsidies in return and you have no say-so on future EU policy.
There was also the issue of future commitments Britain had signed on to as a member - thing like pensions for people like Farage, where Britain has a responsibility to pay it's fair share of the future costs.
But that seems to have been settled now.
I'm sure you felt that was totally unfair too, but in the real world nations can't just go back on their word without consequences as other nations obviously take notice of how the nation respects treaties it's signed before.
Which is why Europe (including even the May-governments Britain) is not a fan of Trump breaking any commitments the US has made that he no longer feels like honoring.
You destroy your international reputation very quickly as a nation, if you act like that, so it was clearly in Britain's own interest to pony up the money it owed.
"Its another case of the EU seeking to have its cake and eat it, already removing Britain from so many functions but expecting us to continue paying subsidies."
No, it's another case of you not accepting the realities of life.
If you're a member of a gym you get to use the facilities - if you leave you no longer do.
In this case Britain no longer wishes to be a full member - but she still wants to retain access to some services. Which the gym (or in this case the EU) then has the right to charge her for.
It's not a complicated concept at all - you and most other Brexiter's just refuse to accept those facts.
"Especially since their making clear they want a blank check."
The EU has made no such demands. Instead the problem is that the May-government can't seem to decide what type and how much access they want to the EU going forward.
Which is the unfortunate result of the different Brexit campaigners promising everything under the sun to get people to vote for Brexit, which means that May's "Brexit means Brexit" means nothing, as the very term Brexit means different things to different people.
Some promised continued access to the EU:s open market - some promised Britain would leave. Some promised access to the customs union - some promised Britain would leave.
Some promised complete control over immigration - some promised continued movement of citizens between Britain and the EU in the future.
And so on and so forth.
The May-government knows full well that whatever relations it seeks with the EU going forward, they will betray some of these promises as some of them are simply mutually excluding.
And May being a very weak PM and party leader, constantly fighting of inter-party sniping and potential coups, she is not in a position or unwilling to give a strong commitment on any fixed version it seems.
Instead the May-government dithers and blames the EU for not simply solving all their problems for them, by giving them all the Brexiter's promised.
But as we all told you years ago - that'll never happen, because that's not in the EU:s best interest.
As soon as May actually decides what type of deal she wants Britain to have with the EU going forward, the EU will be able to crunch the numbers and present a price tag for that amount of access.
But since the Brexiter's promised Britain would get all this for free, no number will obviously ever be satisfying to most people like you.
Which I understand, based on your faulty assumptions. But that's not the EU demanding some "blank check" - that's simply Britain paying just the same as any other non-EU member would for the access she wants to have.
But Britain is of course also entirely free to not seek any such access at all if she wants to minimize her costs to only cover prior commitments like pensions - and there are Brexiter's that support such a stance as well.
"No doubt you will continue to ignore what I say and spout more unsupported conclusions about what I'm saying and why you think I'm saying it."
Well most what you say is rubbish, unfortunately.
I'm the only one of us who have supported ANY of my claims with any kind of source, so I'd get of that high horse if I where you.
Regarding why you're saying things I've made far fewer assumptions then you've claimed. As I pointed out above I've never actually claimed you where "brainwashed by the right wing press" for instance.
But it's clear your understanding of the issue is based on the kind of nonsense eurosceptic propaganda that lead Gove to defend rejection of the facts with the memorable quote "I think that the people of this country have had enough of experts".
Well he, Farage and Johnson convinced a slim majority of Britons to vote for Brexit (whatever version of it each individual voter believed that was) with rubbish like that, and now Britain has to deal with all those consequences all those experts warned about before the referendum.
"I called you a bigot before and i mean it because you refuse to admit you might be less than 100% accurate regardless of what is said."
You can call me whatever you want - it still won't change the facts.
Just like you can rage against the EU for not giving Britain that magical deal that would be best for everyone - but that won't change that fact that no such deal exists.
The British people where sold a pipe-dream that where never going to happen - and now it's not happening.
Just like EVERYONE not actively campaigning for Brexit told you before the referendum.
"However because I'm aware of such problems I'm also aware of how the EU is failing, often in similar fashions."
You seem to make a lot of assumptions about me.
I voted against my own country joining the EU and I'm certainly no uncritical observer of it.
But, I also recognize there is a BIG difference between voting to not join an economic union and voting to leave it after more then four decades, like Britain did.
Your entire economy is now built on access to the EU:s open market and the customs union. You laws and regulations have been streamlined with EU regulation. People have uprooted their families, moved and started new lives based on assumptions about the future that are suddenly put in question.
In a thousand different ways, leaving something like the EU is much, much, much more complicated then joining it in the first place - and it was never going to happen without major disruption.
The problem is that the Brexit campaigners so obviously lied, lied and lied to the British public about what would happen if you left, how easy it would all be and all the free stuff Britain would suddenly receive if you only voted to leave.
And that people like you swallowed all that nonsense and are so sadly misinformed about basic realities of a major decision like this.
And the lies where so easy to spot - with different Brexit campaigners promising mutually excluding version of what would happen!
You obviously can't both be a member and not a member of the open market or the customs union at the same time - but the most basic divisions like that within the Brexit-collective was papered over with the happy assumptions that everything would just work out perfectly if people only voted to leave.
So vote to leave they did, and unfortunately now a lot of the people that did - like you - desperately cling on to the belief that the lies you where told where real and the only reason you're not getting what you where promised is because of the evil EU.
When even IF the EU gave Britain everything YOU personally wanted from Brexit - some Brexiter's still wouldn't be happy, as you can't even agree amongst yourselves exactly what Brexit should look like!
It's a farce and tragedy at the same time, and it won't be good for anyone but Putin and the far-right who lives of scapegoating people.
But as I said that's how democracy works and now we'll just have to accept the consequences.
0
@stevep59
But you present no reason here - only opinions informed by decades of eurosceptic British sentiment. Most of what you write simply isn't true at all, or the world viewed through a fun-house mirror - all distorted.
A) It's not a strawman - it's official UK government policy these days.
And before it became that, it's been the stance of the eurosceptics in Britain for decades.
Every single EU decision that doesn't end exactly like these people have wanted has been decried as some huge injustice to Britain - there have been no understanding what so ever that no nation in a cooperation with 27 others can get it's wish on every single topic.
"I'm saying the EU should negotiate responsibly to get the best terms for its subjects."
And I've told you the best terms for the other member nations is obviously NOT what you or other Brexiter's wish the terms would be.
You're seeing the question from a purely UK-centric perspective, while at the same time arguing that what would be best for Britain would also be best for all other member nations - but it OBVIOUSLY wouldn't!
It's ridiculous that Brexiter's even argue this as the entire reason for any negotiation is obviously always that the different sides has DIFFERING interests!
"Which is not deliberately being obstructive and seeking to bugger Britain about largely for the sake of it apparently."
But the EU isn't being "obstructive" - that would be stalling the negotiations, like the May-government has repeatedly done because they haven't been able to get their act together.
The EU was ready to negotiate long before Britain was and have actively tried to get Britain to speed up the process on many occasions.
What you call "obstructive" and "seeking to bugger Britain about largely for the sake of it" is instead something completely different - it's that the EU negotiators simply aren't giving Britain what she wants and the Brexiter's promised you she would get in the negotiations.
But that's because the EU has a much stronger hand in the negotiations and she doesn't need to give Britain all those concessions you where led to believe she would get.
I know the Brexiter's told you otherwise, but Britain need the EU a hell of a lot more then the rest of Europe needs Britain. I know, I know - that's not at all what you've been told and believe - but that's simply the truth.
Otherwise Britain would obviously be able to dictate the negotiations - like the Brexiter's told you she would. But that isn't happening - now is it?
Germany didn't come crawling on it's knees, desperate to sell it's cars to you, like the Brexiter's promised - now did she?
Nor did Italy or France or any other EU member.
Because it's actually NOT in their best interest to hand Britain everything she asks for, just because they're desperate to keep access to the British market, like the Brexiter's told you.
"Especially since that route is going to cost the EU and its people a lot"
Yes, it will cost them some. But it will cost Britain a hell of a lot more - which means the EU certainly won't blink first in the negotiations.
Also - and much more importantly, and as I've told you repeatedly - the EU actually CAN'T give Britain what the Brexiter's promised you, because we don't live in their fantasy world where only Britain's and the EU's bilateral relation matters.
In the real world, the EU has relations with the rest of the world as well, and it simply CAN'T give Britain a much better deal then anyone else is getting - as that would lead to conflicts with all those other nations.
Now I know you and the other Brexiter's don't give a fig about the EU's situation - but ignoring your negotiating partners situation and demanding the clearly impossible from him will not actually give you more in the real world.
It only makes the Brexiter's demands seem detached from reality and the people arguing for them ridiculous.
Which was all good and well as long as it was internal UK politics.
Farage, Gove and Johnson could promise the British public the moon and anything below it without any real consequences - but it's always been a pipe-dream to ever achieve all of that in negotiations with the EU.
Which, again, EVERYONE that wasn't a Brexit campaigner told you long before the referendum.
"I notice you avoided the points I raised here about why an hostile settlement is a bad result for the EU so I don't expect you to respond to them now but that does make them any less hostile."
And I've told you repeatedly that what you now call a "hostile settlement" actually isn't by far the worst result for the EU.
The EU would much rather lose access to the British markets (if it ever came to that) then it would see their relations with the rest of the world outside the EU deteriorate, because it gives Britain better terms then anyone else.
It's such incredible hubris by the Brexiter's to believe that little Britain would be a more important trading partner for the EU then THE REST OF THE WORLD - but still you people keep making that assumption.
B). I've never neither thought, nor claimed, that you where "brainwashed by the right wing press" - what I've said and stand by is that you'll clearly deluded by the eurosceptic propaganda in Britain.
As far as I know that comes mainly from Ukip, Tory back-benchers and the gutter press - of which I guess most are on the right-wing.
But as far as I know, that sentiment in Britain isn't as much right-wing as it's a populist sentiment. It's just blaming someone else for all your countries problems and offering nonsensical "solutions" to complicated problems. In this case the basic premise that "If we just leave the EU, everything will instantly become much better".
Regarding the BBC, it seems their bias is actually worse then I thought, when they run obvious anti-Labour smears like this and then refuse to even acknowledge their bias or apologize for it:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/may/11/bbc-rejects-complaints-newsnight-corbyn-russian
When they photoshop the leader of the main opposition party to make him look like a Soviet stooge, how impartial can anyone expect them to be on the issue of Brexit?
C). Actually I don't.
The imperialist party in the Gibraltar conflict is obviously Britain, who has occupied a piece of Spain for centuries - not Spain who wish to see their land returned to them.
Your talk of "imperialism" is ridiculous considering the history of the situation, and makes me wonder if you label Ghandi an imperialist as well, for wanting to see his nation regain independence from British rule?
Regarding the wish of the people of Gibraltar that's obviously important and the EU obviously wouldn't back any decision that's not supported by the people who live there.
But with Britain and Gibraltar leaving the EU they obviously no longer can expect to regain the benefits they had as members to automatically continue.
In the referendum on Brexit, every political party and every politician in the Gibraltar parliament supported the remain side, and that side won a whopping 96% of the popular vote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_(Referendum)_Act_2016_(Gibraltar)
Thus we'll just have to wait and see what the population of Gibraltar prefers in the long run - remaining British subjects outside the EU, or becoming Spanish and rejoining the EU.
D). Well Britain have been a member of the EEC/EU for many decades now and I can't say I know for sure how things looked way back when.
But I do know that today, many pro-Brexiter's you find online have absolutely no clue about the realities - because the promoters of Brexit are putting out deliberately misleading statistics.
One favorite trick of theirs is talking about the amount Britain pays to the EU, or it's net contribution, in ABSOLUTE NUMBERS.
Well then obviously, Britain should be amongst the top 2-3 payers, as she's amongst the top 2-3 economies of the EU and the nation with the third largest population in the EU.
So saying she pays a lot more then most other countries in ABSOLUTE NUMBERS says virtually nothing.
Instead, you always have to compare stats like these between nation in PER CAPITA, that is per citizen of the nation.
And looked at the numbers that way, Britain is in fact only the eight largest net contributor, per capita, in the EU.
So yes - Britain is still a net contributor, which all nations certainly aren't - but she's not by far the only or one of very few. Her net contribution per capita is smaller then both Germany and France (as it should be, as she's smaller then them in economy and population size). But she's in fact also contributing less in net contribution then several much smaller nations with much smaller economies.
So it's not like Britain had a worse deal then most other rich, western European, nations. If anything, she actually had a slightly better one - considering her large population and economy.
https://inews.co.uk/news/charts/much-uk-pays-eu-much-get-back/
"My point however is the desire for the subsidy to continue for the foreseeable future despite the UK no longer being in the EU."
The EU has never ever expressed any such desire.
Instead, with Britain leaving she'd be treated just like any other non-member and she will instead have to pay for the access that she wants in the future - just like Norway and Switzerland does today, for instance.
That's not the full EU membership and the fees are lower - but on the other hand you get no subsidies in return and you have no say-so on future EU policy.
There was also the issue of future commitments Britain had signed on to as a member - thing like pensions for people like Farage, where Britain has a responsibility to pay it's fair share of the future costs.
But that seems to have been settled now.
I'm sure you felt that was totally unfair too, but in the real world nations can't just go back on their word without consequences as other nations obviously take notice of how the nation respects treaties it's signed before.
Which is why Europe (including even the May-governments Britain) is not a fan of Trump breaking any commitments the US has made that he no longer feels like honoring.
You destroy your international reputation very quickly as a nation, if you act like that, so it was clearly in Britain's own interest to pony up the money it owed.
"Its another case of the EU seeking to have its cake and eat it, already removing Britain from so many functions but expecting us to continue paying subsidies."
No, it's another case of you not accepting the realities of life.
If you're a member of a gym you get to use the facilities - if you leave you no longer do.
In this case Britain no longer wishes to be a full member - but she still wants to retain access to some services. Which the gym (or in this case the EU) then has the right to charge her for.
It's not a complicated concept at all - you and most other Brexiter's just refuse to accept those facts.
"Especially since their making clear they want a blank check."
The EU has made no such demands. Instead the problem is that the May-government can't seem to decide what type and how much access they want to the EU going forward.
Which is the unfortunate result of the different Brexit campaigners promising everything under the sun to get people to vote for Brexit, which means that May's "Brexit means Brexit" means nothing, as the very term Brexit means different things to different people.
Some promised continued access to the EU:s open market - some promised Britain would leave. Some promised access to the customs union - some promised Britain would leave.
Some promised complete control over immigration - some promised continued movement of citizens between Britain and the EU in the future.
And so on and so forth.
The May-government knows full well that whatever relations it seeks with the EU going forward, they will betray some of these promises as some of them are simply mutually excluding.
And May being a very weak PM and party leader, constantly fighting of inter-party sniping and potential coups, she is not in a position or unwilling to give a strong commitment on any fixed version it seems.
Instead the May-government dithers and blames the EU for not simply solving all their problems for them, by giving them all the Brexiter's promised.
But as we all told you years ago - that'll never happen, because that's not in the EU:s best interest.
As soon as May actually decides what type of deal she wants Britain to have with the EU going forward, the EU will be able to crunch the numbers and present a price tag for that amount of access.
But since the Brexiter's promised Britain would get all this for free, no number will obviously ever be satisfying to most people like you.
Which I understand, based on your faulty assumptions. But that's not the EU demanding some "blank check" - that's simply Britain paying just the same as any other non-EU member would for the access she wants to have.
But Britain is of course also entirely free to not seek any such access at all if she wants to minimize her costs to only cover prior commitments like pensions - and there are Brexiter's that support such a stance as well.
"No doubt you will continue to ignore what I say and spout more unsupported conclusions about what I'm saying and why you think I'm saying it."
Well most what you say is rubbish, unfortunately.
I'm the only one of us who have supported ANY of my claims with any kind of source, so I'd get of that high horse if I where you.
Regarding why you're saying things I've made far fewer assumptions then you've claimed. As I pointed out above I've never actually claimed you where "brainwashed by the right wing press" for instance.
But it's clear your understanding of the issue is based on the kind of nonsense eurosceptic propaganda that lead Gove to defend rejection of the facts with the memorable quote "I think that the people of this country have had enough of experts".
Well he, Farage and Johnson convinced a slim majority of Britons to vote for Brexit (whatever version of it each individual voter believed that was) with rubbish like that, and now Britain has to deal with all those consequences all those experts warned about before the referendum.
"I called you a bigot before and i mean it because you refuse to admit you might be less than 100% accurate regardless of what is said."
You can call me whatever you want - it still won't change the facts.
Just like you can rage against the EU for not giving Britain that magical deal that would be best for everyone - but that won't change that fact that no such deal exists.
The British people where sold a pipe-dream that where never going to happen - and now it's not happening.
Just like EVERYONE not actively campaigning for Brexit told you before the referendum.
"However because I'm aware of such problems I'm also aware of how the EU is failing, often in similar fashions."
You seem to make a lot of assumptions about me.
I voted against my own country joining the EU and I'm certainly no uncritical observer of it.
But, I also recognize there is a BIG difference between voting to not join an economic union and voting to leave it after more then four decades, like Britain did.
Your entire economy is now built on access to the EU:s open market and the customs union. You laws and regulations have been streamlined with EU regulation. People have uprooted their families, moved and started new lives based on assumptions about the future that are suddenly put in question.
In a thousand different ways, leaving something like the EU is much, much, much more complicated then joining it in the first place - and it was never going to happen without major disruption.
The problem is that the Brexit campaigners so obviously lied, lied and lied to the British public about what would happen if you left, how easy it would all be and all the free stuff Britain would suddenly receive if you only voted to leave.
And that people like you swallowed all that nonsense and are so sadly misinformed about basic realities of a major decision like this.
And the lies where so easy to spot - with different Brexit campaigners promising mutually excluding version of what would happen!
You obviously can't both be a member and not a member of the open market or the customs union at the same time - but the most basic divisions like that within the Brexit-collective was papered over with the happy assumptions that everything would just work out perfectly if people only voted to leave.
So vote to leave they did, and unfortunately now a lot of the people that did - like you - desperately cling on to the belief that the lies you where told where real and the only reason you're not getting what you where promised is because of the evil EU.
When even IF the EU gave Britain everything YOU personally wanted from Brexit - some Brexiter's still wouldn't be happy, as you can't even agree amongst yourselves exactly what Brexit should look like!
It's a farce and tragedy at the same time, and it won't be good for anyone but Putin and the far-right who lives of scapegoating people.
But as I said that's how democracy works and now we'll just have to accept the consequences.