I am genuinely interested to know why leaving, with or without a deal is going to be better for the UK?
Is it sovereignty? If so how do you define that and how do you think it will be different outside the EU? Is it our own rights, product, health and environmental standards?
Is it being able to make our own trade deals? If so, how do define success? Is it tariff-free, frictionless trade? and when do you think we will be able to achieve that for 100% of our exports? (already got that with the EU) Here's a useful reminder of what we export and import from where and to who:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_United_Kingdom.
Is it about immigration? If so, immigration from where and how do we put in place controls over and above what we already have?
Take a look at this graph:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UK_Migration_from_1970.svg. The bit in between the green line and the red line on the immigration side, is the bit we already have full control over.
And how will being a single independant state make us more secure, not only in terms of defence, security and protection against terrorism, but also in terms of food security and actually making a meaningful effort to tackle climate change for example (and I trust David Attenborough far more than I do on Donald Trump on that issue!)?
When I look at all these issues in the round and look at the bigger picture of where the world is right now and where it will potentially be in 50 years time, I am really struggling to see how we will be better off and create better more diverse opportunities for younger generations and those that come after them. Whether or not it feels right for the older generations and those who are currently comfortably off (but perceive they could be better off) is another issue and it should not really be the issue that decides the argument for potentially generations to come.
In essence, this issue is way too complicated, way too nuanced to be decided by a single binary referendum when those asked the question were blatantly lied to by both sides (with at least one side almost certainly guilty of breaking the rules) and the full facts were not available or presented in an unbiased way that could be easily digested asked to make the decision.
All in all, whichever way you voted and whatever you believe, you have to see the complexity of this issue and the deeply flawed way in which it has been carried out (from the triggering of Art 50 to the utterly shambolic negotiations) , means that very few people will win anything...apart from a very rich elite who aren't really that affected in the first place
I for one wish we had never been asked - not because I have any deep love for the EU, but because the issue was never black and white - it was always way more complicated and intricate that that. But that is the decision we've been asked to make.
We have been played, to try and settle a political argument and to try to help the rich get richer. Gideon and the pig head shagger have A LOT to answer for.