Body & Soul0 min ago
Alastair Campbell, Elton, John, Gary Lineker, Nick Clegg, Vince Cable, Tony Blair And Many More Remoaners...
91 Answers
If you're not happy with the democratic process of the UK, then why not sell up, pack your bags and ship yourselves off to a non-democratic country, how does Iraq, Libya, Cuba, Morocco, Turkmenistan, China or Qatar sound, lets see how long you last!
You lost the vote, get over it and thank your lucky stars that a gun wasn't held to your head, telling you HOW to vote and who to vote for!
You lost the vote, get over it and thank your lucky stars that a gun wasn't held to your head, telling you HOW to vote and who to vote for!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by saintpeter48. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Or you could go to Thailand?
https:/
How hypocritical one can be......
https:/
How hypocritical one can be......
Interesting. Was the real point of the Brexit vote anti-immigrants, which might or might not have anything to do with the EU?
But then again, maybe the underlying reason was the revolt of the anti-London brigade - a convenient shorthand for the disaffected and ignored ‘rest’ of Britain, so long overlooked by right-wing governments.
Well, they’ve still got the immigrants, thankfully.
Maybe the ‘Yes’ voters should analyse their votes and their situation, and act as a united class, rather than sheep in a field.
But then again, maybe the underlying reason was the revolt of the anti-London brigade - a convenient shorthand for the disaffected and ignored ‘rest’ of Britain, so long overlooked by right-wing governments.
Well, they’ve still got the immigrants, thankfully.
Maybe the ‘Yes’ voters should analyse their votes and their situation, and act as a united class, rather than sheep in a field.
Most polls I've seen tend to suggest that (a) most people's opinions are largely the same as they were 2 years ago, but that (b) there has been a slight drift in favour of remain -- or more generally in favour of a second referendum -- in the last year or so.
The thing that Leavers probably ought to concede is that even a very slight drift is still enough to swing the vote entirely the other way. This is the problem with referendums in general, and close referendums in particular: the winner in a 52-48 result can't really claim a truly decisive win. I wouldn't be surprised if, were the referendum to have been held just one week earlier, it would have been something like 51-49 in favour of remain.
That's clearly only speculation on my part but nevertheless the truth is that public opinion is virtually split down the middle on the issue, and has been for a long time. In such a situation it's frankly ludicrous to expect either side to give up the struggle for their cause and to back the other lot wholeheartedly. If we are to continue pursuing this policy, then the onus is on Brexiters to deliver the successful Brexit they claim is possible, rather than to rely on Remainers to do it for them -- and certainly they shouldn't be exactly surprised if Remainers don't deliver the Brexit they wanted.
Or, in short: if you really want me to back this -- as if my support makes a ha'pennorth of difference anyway -- stop telling me that I should back it and start telling me *why*. Sell your vision. Deliver it. Prove me wrong.
The thing that Leavers probably ought to concede is that even a very slight drift is still enough to swing the vote entirely the other way. This is the problem with referendums in general, and close referendums in particular: the winner in a 52-48 result can't really claim a truly decisive win. I wouldn't be surprised if, were the referendum to have been held just one week earlier, it would have been something like 51-49 in favour of remain.
That's clearly only speculation on my part but nevertheless the truth is that public opinion is virtually split down the middle on the issue, and has been for a long time. In such a situation it's frankly ludicrous to expect either side to give up the struggle for their cause and to back the other lot wholeheartedly. If we are to continue pursuing this policy, then the onus is on Brexiters to deliver the successful Brexit they claim is possible, rather than to rely on Remainers to do it for them -- and certainly they shouldn't be exactly surprised if Remainers don't deliver the Brexit they wanted.
Or, in short: if you really want me to back this -- as if my support makes a ha'pennorth of difference anyway -- stop telling me that I should back it and start telling me *why*. Sell your vision. Deliver it. Prove me wrong.
If there is a ‘slight drift’, I’d hazard a guess it’s not because minds have been changed, but because the drifters are sick and tired of watching democracy being systematically strangled to death in the whole interminable, duplicitous, shebang. I foresee the polling booths of the future wanting for occupants.
The devious hope among seekers of a second referendum is that it could be swung to have three choices; not simply stay or leave, but with the added choice of accepting the "deal" thereby splitting (and weakening) the vote.
If you had a second referendum now, what would you have it on?
As Gerard Batten says, “If you had it on the deal, which is going to be pretty rubbish I think at the end of the process, Remainers will vote against it because they don’t want to leave and Leavers like me wouldn’t want to vote for it because we think it’s a rubbish deal.
So the vote wouldn’t actually tell you anything.
You’d have to have a second referendum on do you want to leave or do you want to remain.
I don’t think that’s necessary because we had one, but I think if there was one you’d actually get a much higher vote now for Leavers.
Confronted with three-way Brexit referendum on whether to Remain in the EU, accept Mrs May's deal or leave the EU without an agreement, that will overturn the result of the referendum.
When we had the referendum there was no question of we’ll have another vote when the deal was worked out."
If you had a second referendum now, what would you have it on?
As Gerard Batten says, “If you had it on the deal, which is going to be pretty rubbish I think at the end of the process, Remainers will vote against it because they don’t want to leave and Leavers like me wouldn’t want to vote for it because we think it’s a rubbish deal.
So the vote wouldn’t actually tell you anything.
You’d have to have a second referendum on do you want to leave or do you want to remain.
I don’t think that’s necessary because we had one, but I think if there was one you’d actually get a much higher vote now for Leavers.
Confronted with three-way Brexit referendum on whether to Remain in the EU, accept Mrs May's deal or leave the EU without an agreement, that will overturn the result of the referendum.
When we had the referendum there was no question of we’ll have another vote when the deal was worked out."
//I don’t think that’s necessary because we had one, but I think if there was one you’d actually get a much higher vote now for Leavers. //
It would really depend on the 13 million or so who didn't vote. Most polls I've read since the referendum suggested that the majority were Remainers. In fact the problem the Remain camp had was getting supporters to go to the polling stations as they thought it was in the bag.
It would really depend on the 13 million or so who didn't vote. Most polls I've read since the referendum suggested that the majority were Remainers. In fact the problem the Remain camp had was getting supporters to go to the polling stations as they thought it was in the bag.
//the winner in a 52-48 result can't really claim a truly decisive win//
Exactly the point, Jim. If the nation were not deeply divided broadly 50/50 over membership then there would be no need for a referendum.
If there were accomodations and compromises possible with the EU (tried by Camerone) such that we could be, as it were, half-pregnant,
then there would be no need for a referendum.
It's the same broad division and its either/or, but not both which led to the referendum. It is the alternative to civil war which is how thee last similar issue was resolved. It was supposed to be a peaceful way of resolving a massively contentious issue.
/- then there wer. I
Exactly the point, Jim. If the nation were not deeply divided broadly 50/50 over membership then there would be no need for a referendum.
If there were accomodations and compromises possible with the EU (tried by Camerone) such that we could be, as it were, half-pregnant,
then there would be no need for a referendum.
It's the same broad division and its either/or, but not both which led to the referendum. It is the alternative to civil war which is how thee last similar issue was resolved. It was supposed to be a peaceful way of resolving a massively contentious issue.
/- then there wer. I
If return of sovereignty and losing the unelected foreign elite dictating what applies to you doesn't automatically sell itself immediately I doubt there's much hope of convincing further. Economies go up and down. Countries that are a good investment don't tend to stay with issues long, so any transition period isn't really a major factor.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.