FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Tony Blair Interview with Andrew Neil
Tony Blair Interview with Andrew Neil
Jump to: Newest in thread
"Apparently Tony thinks a second referendum would settle Brexit argument even if it was 51% to 49% but can't accept the original result!"
I watched it earlier. Laughable stuff Blair was coming out with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Apparently Tony thinks a second referendum would settle Brexit argument even if it was 51% to 49% but can't accept the original result!
I watched it earlier. Laughable stuff Blair was coming out with. "
How the creep managed to win three elections I will never know! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Apparently Tony thinks a second referendum would settle Brexit argument even if it was 51% to 49% but can't accept the original result!
I watched it earlier. Laughable stuff Blair was coming out with.
How the creep managed to win three elections I will never know!"
When he said to Andrew Neil a referendum would settle the issue for good, and Andrew Neil told him "The politicians told the British people that last time", and Blair replied "Yes but this time really would settle it" I don't know how he kept a straight face. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Apparently Tony thinks a second referendum would settle Brexit argument even if it was 51% to 49% but can't accept the original result!
I watched it earlier. Laughable stuff Blair was coming out with.
How the creep managed to win three elections I will never know!
When he said to Andrew Neil a referendum would settle the issue for good, and Andrew Neil told him "The politicians told the British people that last time", and Blair replied "Yes but this time really would settle it" I don't know how he kept a straight face. "
He's had plenty of practice after all he's been telling lies for years!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Apparently Tony thinks a second referendum would settle Brexit argument even if it was 51% to 49% but can't accept the original result!
I watched it earlier. Laughable stuff Blair was coming out with.
How the creep managed to win three elections I will never know!"
The simple undeniable fact is that the people who before 97 had voted tory switched..
Centre ground and all that..
Ps, after 97 this leftie didn't..
Is what he is saying and whilst not seen it will take what you've said in good faith, any different to what Farage said just before the vote?
Maybe they are a bit similar.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
The Evening Standard had a new poll today, showing 56% would vote Remain if asked again.
All that does is tell you it is still very finely balanced and would not be "settled" by a new referendum.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Apparently Tony thinks a second referendum would settle Brexit argument even if it was 51% to 49% but can't accept the original result!
I watched it earlier. Laughable stuff Blair was coming out with.
How the creep managed to win three elections I will never know!
The simple undeniable fact is that the people who before 97 had voted tory switched..
Centre ground and all that..
Ps, after 97 this leftie didn't..
Is what he is saying and whilst not seen it will take what you've said in good faith, any different to what Farage said just before the vote?
Maybe they are a bit similar.. "
Remainers have said since the vote that the margin was too close
now Tony thinks an even closer margin would bring it all to an end!An out of touch fool! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
I bet the referendum supporters are thinking thats a second one out the window now hes opened his mouth.Dont know why he keeps putting his oar in,neal said he was going round telling them to give us a bad deal and we would cave in. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The Evening Standard had a new poll today, showing 56% would vote Remain if asked again.
All that does is tell you it is still very finely balanced and would not be "settled" by a new referendum.
"
can you imagine the split in the country if we had a second vote and that was the margin it would take decades to repair do you think it would be worth it ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The Evening Standard had a new poll today, showing 56% would vote Remain if asked again.
All that does is tell you it is still very finely balanced and would not be "settled" by a new referendum.
can you imagine the split in the country if we had a second vote and that was the margin it would take decades to repair do you think it would be worth it ?"
Foxy brexit will be an issue for your entire lifespan whatever happens next.That much is inevitable.Just roll with it...  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I bet the referendum supporters are thinking thats a second one out the window now hes opened his mouth.Dont know why he keeps putting his oar in,neal said he was going round telling them to give us a bad deal and we would cave in."
He needs a bit more cash from the Euro gravy train for his retirement! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"
can you imagine the split in the country if we had a second vote and that was the margin it would take decades to repair do you think it would be worth it ?"
No.
We had a referendum on Leave/Remain.
The only credible referendum would be on Deal/No-Deal, but I do not want one of those either.
In Quebec, they had three referenda in the space of a few years on seceding from Canada.
The neverendum, they called it.
This would be the same.
Imagine if the result was 52/48 the other way.
It would solve nothing. In fact, it probably paralyses things even more.
No, the parliamentarians got a direction from the people.
It's their job now to work out the "how".
I had my say. I can't do anything more now about it, so it isn't keeping me awake at night.
Que Sera Sera
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Apparently Tony thinks a second referendum would settle Brexit argument even if it was 51% to 49% but can't accept the original result!
I watched it earlier. Laughable stuff Blair was coming out with.
How the creep managed to win three elections I will never know!"
I’m choosing one of
A) weak opposition.
B) People didn’t know what they were voting for
C) The people are dumb.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Apparently Tony thinks a second referendum would settle Brexit argument even if it was 51% to 49% but can't accept the original result!"
only because he still has delusions of grandeur about becoming president of the EU. Missing out on this has really miffed him bigstyle. He has a lot to answer for dragging us into a war nobody wanted
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *imiUKMan
over a year ago
Hereford |
There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I bet the referendum supporters are thinking thats a second one out the window now hes opened his mouth.Dont know why he keeps putting his oar in,neal said he was going round telling them to give us a bad deal and we would cave in."
Not necessarily pro a second ref.
But yes, he opens his gob about it, and the drive for it could well drop. :p |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing."
I think if it produced a result around 70:30 either way it would probably be seen as decisive.
However I don't think such a majority by either side is possible. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He's entitled to his views, he's clearly a strong believer in the EU and as such has every right to voice his opinions.
"
It is not his views on the EU or any other policy subject I have problems with, provided he states them as a private individual. It is his openly stated position that he would rather see a Conservative government than a Labour government with JC as PM and then campaigns in direct opposition to Labour policy as adopted by conference and uses his status as a former Labour PM to justify his position. He is a disgusting slime who even now is working to advance Tory policies and many are still taken in by the smarmy git. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"Forget a second referendum forget an election. Its all delay tactics. Its time the stupidity stopped. "
But this isn't really about the EU, is it?
It is much darker and much deeper than that.
Membership of the EU is just the catalyst.
Populists in 2016 made promises to the public that were impossible to deliver.
Now the chickens are coming home roost.
Now it is about Britain and a struggle for its identity, for its future.
On the one hand, those clinging to delusions of a grand power capable of imposing its will on weaker states.
On the other, those trying to reconcile reality with rhetoric.
We are heading so far down the rabbit hole that it is anyone's guess what this looks like on the other.
The dog days of empire.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The Evening Standard had a new poll today, showing 56% would vote Remain if asked again.
All that does is tell you it is still very finely balanced and would not be "settled" by a new referendum.
can you imagine the split in the country if we had a second vote and that was the margin it would take decades to repair do you think it would be worth it ?
Foxy brexit will be an issue for your entire lifespan whatever happens next.That much is inevitable.Just roll with it... "
lmao bob iv been rolling woth it for 2 and half yrs it’s you and the remianers been banging on about lies red bus the cliff edge the end of the world as we know it mate I just want out now so we can all just crack on iv got better things to look forward to this yr |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing."
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
All these claims people didnt know what they were voting for are rubbish it was an easy question leave or remain.You can quote leave soundbits as not true band use that as a reason but on the same hand remain were predicting mass unemployment house prices falling i could go on.The point is people still voted to leave despite that does that not tell you how bad they wanted to leave |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"Why is a verifiable war criminal allowed onto the BBC anyway.... Tony B.liar should be in the dock alongside Bush JR at the Hague...shire o' shyte
But its not verifiable is it?
"
Only because of the gallons of whitewash used |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Why is a verifiable war criminal allowed onto the BBC anyway.... Tony B.liar should be in the dock alongside Bush JR at the Hague...shire o' shyte
But its not verifiable is it?
"
Even the luke warm Hutton report points to lies and propaganda used to murder over 1M Iraq civillians.... take a look at non mainstream media and dig up a few truths about the Iraq war |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *anes HubbyCouple
over a year ago
Babbacombe Torquay |
"Why is a verifiable war criminal allowed onto the BBC anyway.... Tony B.liar should be in the dock alongside Bush JR at the Hague...shire o' shyte
But its not verifiable is it?
Even the luke warm Hutton report points to lies and propaganda used to murder over 1M Iraq civillians.... take a look at non mainstream media and dig up a few truths about the Iraq war"
The decision Blair made to attack Iraq would have been made by ALL and ANY political leader in the UK at that time.
If he's a war criminal on that basis then many before and since Blair could also have been dragged before the Hague. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why is a verifiable war criminal allowed onto the BBC anyway.... Tony B.liar should be in the dock alongside Bush JR at the Hague...shire o' shyte
But its not verifiable is it?
Even the luke warm Hutton report points to lies and propaganda used to murder over 1M Iraq civillians.... take a look at non mainstream media and dig up a few truths about the Iraq war
The decision Blair made to attack Iraq would have been made by ALL and ANY political leader in the UK at that time.
If he's a war criminal on that basis then many before and since Blair could also have been dragged before the Hague. "
This..
The vast majority of the Tories and others backed every step taken in the run up to that needless ego trip..
Funny that on the stop the war march I don't recall seeing any tory politicians.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"Why is a verifiable war criminal allowed onto the BBC anyway.... Tony B.liar should be in the dock alongside Bush JR at the Hague...shire o' shyte
But its not verifiable is it?
Even the luke warm Hutton report points to lies and propaganda used to murder over 1M Iraq civillians.... take a look at non mainstream media and dig up a few truths about the Iraq war
The decision Blair made to attack Iraq would have been made by ALL and ANY political leader in the UK at that time.
If he's a war criminal on that basis then many before and since Blair could also have been dragged before the Hague.
This..
The vast majority of the Tories and others backed every step taken in the run up to that needless ego trip..
Funny that on the stop the war march I don't recall seeing any tory politicians.. "
yes i think they did back him on his lies of weapons of mass destruction whether they would have if they knew the truth who knows. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *anes HubbyCouple
over a year ago
Babbacombe Torquay |
"Why is a verifiable war criminal allowed onto the BBC anyway.... Tony B.liar should be in the dock alongside Bush JR at the Hague...shire o' shyte
But its not verifiable is it?
Even the luke warm Hutton report points to lies and propaganda used to murder over 1M Iraq civillians.... take a look at non mainstream media and dig up a few truths about the Iraq war
The decision Blair made to attack Iraq would have been made by ALL and ANY political leader in the UK at that time.
If he's a war criminal on that basis then many before and since Blair could also have been dragged before the Hague.
This..
The vast majority of the Tories and others backed every step taken in the run up to that needless ego trip..
Funny that on the stop the war march I don't recall seeing any tory politicians.. yes i think they did back him on his lies of weapons of mass destruction whether they would have if they knew the truth who knows."
It's well documented that as the official opposition at the time the Tories had complete access to the same intelligence brief that Blair had.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"All these claims people didnt know what they were voting for are rubbish it was an easy question leave or remain.You can quote leave soundbits as not true band use that as a reason but on the same hand remain were predicting mass unemployment house prices falling i could go on.The point is people still voted to leave despite that does that not tell you how bad they wanted to leave"
Funny I DELIBERATELY did not single out either side. I said both sides and I did not say the referendum WAS illegitimate. I said that it was claimed to be illegitimate and why (on both sides). Yet the first thing you do is defend 1 side and attack the other while ignoring that neither side was able to get 40% of those registered to vote to support them.
So, NO! The people did not vote to leave! (Even less than voted to leave voted to stay!)
And unless you and those like you wake up and realise that if you force this on the country in the way you are now then the country will not survive brexit!
I do not have a clue how a second referendum will turn out, except for the fact that the only chance the Union has of surviving is if there is a second referendum.
And your (and the Tories choice) is simple, force brexit through (I for one accept that is possible) and first loose Scotland (although I have a feeling it may be too late to save that part of the union already), then NI, before watching the breakup of England and maybe a decent into a second English Civil War. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"All these claims people didnt know what they were voting for are rubbish it was an easy question leave or remain.You can quote leave soundbits as not true band use that as a reason but on the same hand remain were predicting mass unemployment house prices falling i could go on.The point is people still voted to leave despite that does that not tell you how bad they wanted to leave
Funny I DELIBERATELY did not single out either side. I said both sides and I did not say the referendum WAS illegitimate. I said that it was claimed to be illegitimate and why (on both sides). Yet the first thing you do is defend 1 side and attack the other while ignoring that neither side was able to get 40% of those registered to vote to support them.
So, NO! The people did not vote to leave! (Even less than voted to leave voted to stay!)
And unless you and those like you wake up and realise that if you force this on the country in the way you are now then the country will not survive brexit!
I do not have a clue how a second referendum will turn out, except for the fact that the only chance the Union has of surviving is if there is a second referendum.
And your (and the Tories choice) is simple, force brexit through (I for one accept that is possible) and first loose Scotland (although I have a feeling it may be too late to save that part of the union already), then NI, before watching the breakup of England and maybe a decent into a second English Civil War."
disagree if there’s a second vote democracy is dead and the country will be spilt for decades |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"All these claims people didnt know what they were voting for are rubbish it was an easy question leave or remain.You can quote leave soundbits as not true band use that as a reason but on the same hand remain were predicting mass unemployment house prices falling i could go on.The point is people still voted to leave despite that does that not tell you how bad they wanted to leave
Funny I DELIBERATELY did not single out either side. I said both sides and I did not say the referendum WAS illegitimate. I said that it was claimed to be illegitimate and why (on both sides). Yet the first thing you do is defend 1 side and attack the other while ignoring that neither side was able to get 40% of those registered to vote to support them.
So, NO! The people did not vote to leave! (Even less than voted to leave voted to stay!)
And unless you and those like you wake up and realise that if you force this on the country in the way you are now then the country will not survive brexit!
I do not have a clue how a second referendum will turn out, except for the fact that the only chance the Union has of surviving is if there is a second referendum.
And your (and the Tories choice) is simple, force brexit through (I for one accept that is possible) and first loose Scotland (although I have a feeling it may be too late to save that part of the union already), then NI, before watching the breakup of England and maybe a decent into a second English Civil War."
That is your view i take the view that a second referendum will have the exact same effect .The snp only want one so they have a legitimate reason for calling another on independence, everyone is using brexit for there own agenda labour for a general election instead of getting on with it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We knew what we were voting on. To leave the Eu.
It was never clear what we were voting for. In fact we were likely all voting for different things.
If Mays deal was criticised for being a legitimate version of brexit, but no deal was a better version, and for clearly defined reasons, then you’d say maybe most of us did know what we were voting for.
But talks of “proper Brexit” “BINO” and “not what I voted for” suggest it was never clear what many were voting for.
Eg did we vote for the removal of a CU? If not, how much should it be a reason for rejectingMays deal ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"We knew what we were voting on. To leave the Eu.
It was never clear what we were voting for. In fact we were likely all voting for different things.
If Mays deal was criticised for being a legitimate version of brexit, but no deal was a better version, and for clearly defined reasons, then you’d say maybe most of us did know what we were voting for.
But talks of “proper Brexit” “BINO” and “not what I voted for” suggest it was never clear what many were voting for.
Eg did we vote for the removal of a CU? If not, how much should it be a reason for rejectingMays deal ?"
Well we voted to leave as for what version that it why we have mps to sort that out you cant go back to the people every time and ask is this ok is that ok. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"All these claims people didnt know what they were voting for are rubbish it was an easy question leave or remain.You can quote leave soundbits as not true band use that as a reason but on the same hand remain were predicting mass unemployment house prices falling i could go on.The point is people still voted to leave despite that does that not tell you how bad they wanted to leave
Funny I DELIBERATELY did not single out either side. I said both sides and I did not say the referendum WAS illegitimate. I said that it was claimed to be illegitimate and why (on both sides). Yet the first thing you do is defend 1 side and attack the other while ignoring that neither side was able to get 40% of those registered to vote to support them.
So, NO! The people did not vote to leave! (Even less than voted to leave voted to stay!)
And unless you and those like you wake up and realise that if you force this on the country in the way you are now then the country will not survive brexit!
I do not have a clue how a second referendum will turn out, except for the fact that the only chance the Union has of surviving is if there is a second referendum.
And your (and the Tories choice) is simple, force brexit through (I for one accept that is possible) and first loose Scotland (although I have a feeling it may be too late to save that part of the union already), then NI, before watching the breakup of England and maybe a decent into a second English Civil War.That is your view i take the view that a second referendum will have the exact same effect .The snp only want one so they have a legitimate reason for calling another on independence, everyone is using brexit for there own agenda labour for a general election instead of getting on with it."
The leave scenario is a stronger reason for an independence referendum I actually think the SNP are being one of the few partya actually acting in theircountrys real interests. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"All these claims people didnt know what they were voting for are rubbish it was an easy question leave or remain.You can quote leave soundbits as not true band use that as a reason but on the same hand remain were predicting mass unemployment house prices falling i could go on.The point is people still voted to leave despite that does that not tell you how bad they wanted to leave
Funny I DELIBERATELY did not single out either side. I said both sides and I did not say the referendum WAS illegitimate. I said that it was claimed to be illegitimate and why (on both sides). Yet the first thing you do is defend 1 side and attack the other while ignoring that neither side was able to get 40% of those registered to vote to support them.
So, NO! The people did not vote to leave! (Even less than voted to leave voted to stay!)
And unless you and those like you wake up and realise that if you force this on the country in the way you are now then the country will not survive brexit!
I do not have a clue how a second referendum will turn out, except for the fact that the only chance the Union has of surviving is if there is a second referendum.
And your (and the Tories choice) is simple, force brexit through (I for one accept that is possible) and first loose Scotland (although I have a feeling it may be too late to save that part of the union already), then NI, before watching the breakup of England and maybe a decent into a second English Civil War. disagree if there’s a second vote democracy is dead and the country will be spilt for decades "
Society is already broken and split another referendum can't do anymore damage.The damage has been done and the chasm between the different views is widening.
Brexit will be an issue for the 20 years..Whatever happens I'm off down the Winchester for a few jars...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *imiUKMan
over a year ago
Hereford |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote. "
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Apparently Tony thinks a second referendum would settle Brexit argument even if it was 51% to 49% but can't accept the original result!"
Depends if you cheat! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Apparently Tony thinks a second referendum would settle Brexit argument even if it was 51% to 49% but can't accept the original result!
Depends if you cheat!"
Didn't your mum tell you cheats never prosper. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU. "
Given that so much of UK economic activity depends on our neighbours, we'd be hammered whether we were in the EU or out.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why is a verifiable war criminal allowed onto the BBC anyway.... Tony B.liar should be in the dock alongside Bush JR at the Hague...shire o' shyte
But its not verifiable is it?
Even the luke warm Hutton report points to lies and propaganda used to murder over 1M Iraq civillians.... take a look at non mainstream media and dig up a few truths about the Iraq war
The decision Blair made to attack Iraq would have been made by ALL and ANY political leader in the UK at that time.
If he's a war criminal on that basis then many before and since Blair could also have been dragged before the Hague.
This..
The vast majority of the Tories and others backed every step taken in the run up to that needless ego trip..
Funny that on the stop the war march I don't recall seeing any tory politicians.. yes i think they did back him on his lies of weapons of mass destruction whether they would have if they knew the truth who knows.
It's well documented that as the official opposition at the time the Tories had complete access to the same intelligence brief that Blair had.
"
This..
As with similar matters of national importance certain information in that case the 'intelligence' was shared..
Standard practise.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU. "
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *imiUKMan
over a year ago
Hereford |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!"
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The current weighted national poll has significant win for remain, with exodus from a managed or no deal exit, now that people understand the details of what leaving means in reality. If there were no further lies or illegal practices permitted in a vote on the actual offers and options, it's clearly intelligence prevailing to win for the country by remaining.
It's strange that some who say they love democracy want it to be democracy from the past. Thongs change - UK passports used to be in French but I've not heard a drive to get new passports to be traditional French language UK passports by those who are for retro democracy
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *imiUKMan
over a year ago
Hereford |
"The current weighted national poll has significant win for remain, with exodus from a managed or no deal exit, now that people understand the details of what leaving means in reality. If there were no further lies or illegal practices permitted in a vote on the actual offers and options, it's clearly intelligence prevailing to win for the country by remaining.
It's strange that some who say they love democracy want it to be democracy from the past. Thongs change - UK passports used to be in French but I've not heard a drive to get new passports to be traditional French language UK passports by those who are for retro democracy
"
Significant? Not the ones I've seen.
Polls are not going to take into account people who haven't voted before. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We knew what we were voting on. To leave the Eu.
It was never clear what we were voting for. In fact we were likely all voting for different things.
If Mays deal was criticised for being a legitimate version of brexit, but no deal was a better version, and for clearly defined reasons, then you’d say maybe most of us did know what we were voting for.
But talks of “proper Brexit” “BINO” and “not what I voted for” suggest it was never clear what many were voting for.
Eg did we vote for the removal of a CU? If not, how much should it be a reason for rejectingMays deal ?Well we voted to leave as for what version that it why we have mps to sort that out you cant go back to the people every time and ask is this ok is that ok. "
It's a question of such complexity and significance that the whole question should have been answered by government, as representatives of the people. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The current weighted national poll has significant win for remain, with exodus from a managed or no deal exit, now that people understand the details of what leaving means in reality. If there were no further lies or illegal practices permitted in a vote on the actual offers and options, it's clearly intelligence prevailing to win for the country by remaining.
It's strange that some who say they love democracy want it to be democracy from the past. Thongs change - UK passports used to be in French but I've not heard a drive to get new passports to be traditional French language UK passports by those who are for retro democracy
"
Didn't the polls from the 2016 referendum have remain to win and look what happened, now Tony's popped up like a bad smell it should be an easy win for leave if there was another |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The current weighted national poll has significant win for remain, with exodus from a managed or no deal exit, now that people understand the details of what leaving means in reality. If there were no further lies or illegal practices permitted in a vote on the actual offers and options, it's clearly intelligence prevailing to win for the country by remaining.
It's strange that some who say they love democracy want it to be democracy from the past. Thongs change - UK passports used to be in French but I've not heard a drive to get new passports to be traditional French language UK passports by those who are for retro democracy
Significant? Not the ones I've seen.
Polls are not going to take into account people who haven't voted before. "
It's split and weighted by age, gender and location, with their prior and prospective voting intentions specified.
A separate aspect - Tomorrow if also the day that the UK switches to remain, due to population changes - those who love matured and those others who have passed away. Demographic changes now mean the UK is a different beast. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why do ppl even talk about polls look at the recent history of polls there terrible lol"
The evidence of their accuracy is showing that they have been improving - despite our bias telling us otherwise. £billions are spent on them because they yield massive power, allowing others to influence us ever more strongly |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The current weighted national poll has significant win for remain, with exodus from a managed or no deal exit, now that people understand the details of what leaving means in reality. If there were no further lies or illegal practices permitted in a vote on the actual offers and options, it's clearly intelligence prevailing to win for the country by remaining.
It's strange that some who say they love democracy want it to be democracy from the past. Thongs change - UK passports used to be in French but I've not heard a drive to get new passports to be traditional French language UK passports by those who are for retro democracy
Significant? Not the ones I've seen.
Polls are not going to take into account people who haven't voted before.
It's split and weighted by age, gender and location, with their prior and prospective voting intentions specified.
A separate aspect - Tomorrow if also the day that the UK switches to remain, due to population changes - those who love matured and those others who have passed away. Demographic changes now mean the UK is a different beast."
I would imagine many elderly leavers have popped their clogs recently while watching the farce in parliament..
Always a silver lining  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this...."
So your taking the bet then? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why do ppl even talk about polls look at the recent history of polls there terrible lol
The evidence of their accuracy is showing that they have been improving - despite our bias telling us otherwise. £billions are spent on them because they yield massive power, allowing others to influence us ever more strongly"
Lol I bet you thought the polls would be accurate last time, look at the nasty shock you had then,2 1/2 years later and you still haven't got over it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *estivalMan
over a year ago
borehamwood |
"Why do ppl even talk about polls look at the recent history of polls there terrible lol
I always lie when asked which way I voted outside..  "
ive never been asked if i was though think id tell them the oppisite of what i had done |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!"
I will take that bet but it will not be France.
More like Italy.
I would have said Poland next but they get more out than they put in.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The current weighted national poll has significant win for remain, with exodus from a managed or no deal exit, now that people understand the details of what leaving means in reality. If there were no further lies or illegal practices permitted in a vote on the actual offers and options, it's clearly intelligence prevailing to win for the country by remaining.
It's strange that some who say they love democracy want it to be democracy from the past. Thongs change - UK passports used to be in French but I've not heard a drive to get new passports to be traditional French language UK passports by those who are for retro democracy
Significant? Not the ones I've seen.
Polls are not going to take into account people who haven't voted before.
It's split and weighted by age, gender and location, with their prior and prospective voting intentions specified.
A separate aspect - Tomorrow if also the day that the UK switches to remain, due to population changes - those who love matured and those others who have passed away. Demographic changes now mean the UK is a different beast.
I would imagine many elderly leavers have popped their clogs recently while watching the farce in parliament..
Always a silver lining "
And some of the young snow flakes might have grown up and had a bite on the pie that is reality and seen sense |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *anes HubbyCouple
over a year ago
Babbacombe Torquay |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this...."
Are you sure?, not from what I've seen and read.... Its anti establishment and anti austerity from the news reports I've been watching.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why do ppl even talk about polls look at the recent history of polls there terrible lol
The evidence of their accuracy is showing that they have been improving - despite our bias telling us otherwise. £billions are spent on them because they yield massive power, allowing others to influence us ever more strongly
Lol I bet you thought the polls would be accurate last time, look at the nasty shock you had then,2 1/2 years later and you still haven't got over it"
The scientific method doesn't really work that way. You'll need to study the credible literature to evaluate the published research.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU. "
Yep. It really is laughable when people like Will try to make out it was a low turn out. The fact is the vote to leave was the biggest vote for anything, ever in the entire history of the UK. The overall turnout was over 70%. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why do ppl even talk about polls look at the recent history of polls there terrible lol
The evidence of their accuracy is showing that they have been improving - despite our bias telling us otherwise. £billions are spent on them because they yield massive power, allowing others to influence us ever more strongly
Lol I bet you thought the polls would be accurate last time, look at the nasty shock you had then,2 1/2 years later and you still haven't got over it
The scientific method doesn't really work that way. You'll need to study the credible literature to evaluate the published research.
"
I don't think I will bother, you can do it if you like and then come back and tell me they aren't as accurate as you try to make out!No need to worry now Tony's put his two penneth in it's all over for remain, I knew he would be useful one day! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why do ppl even talk about polls look at the recent history of polls there terrible lol
The evidence of their accuracy is showing that they have been improving - despite our bias telling us otherwise. £billions are spent on them because they yield massive power, allowing others to influence us ever more strongly
Lol I bet you thought the polls would be accurate last time, look at the nasty shock you had then,2 1/2 years later and you still haven't got over it
The scientific method doesn't really work that way. You'll need to study the credible literature to evaluate the published research.
"
Maybe you need to study the Populous opinion poll that gave remain a 10 point lead over Leave on the eve of the referendum in 2016, lol. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Having watched the broadcast (and many commenting would not have seen it in it's entirety), regardless of where you stand on brexit, does anyone else think that the whole purpose of the Andrew Neil interview was to reinforce the perception that Blair is an arsehole to anyone who may not yet have realised? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Having watched the broadcast (and many commenting would not have seen it in it's entirety), regardless of where you stand on brexit, does anyone else think that the whole purpose of the Andrew Neil interview was to reinforce the perception that Blair is an arsehole to anyone who may not yet have realised?"
That about sums it up! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this...."
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?"
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France."
There is going to be a Spring of discontent across Europe from March/April.
What has happened in France is just a taster.
If it wasn't for the weather and Christmas getting in the way it would have been a lot worse.
Why do you think the UK Police applied for permission to shoot rioters in times of civil disobedience. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France."
Ok then, I'll bet on either within 3 years pm me...didn't see your post |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"He's entitled to his views, he's clearly a strong believer in the EU and as such has every right to voice his opinions.
It is not his views on the EU or any other policy subject I have problems with, provided he states them as a private individual. It is his openly stated position that he would rather see a Conservative government than a Labour government with JC as PM and then campaigns in direct opposition to Labour policy as adopted by conference and uses his status as a former Labour PM to justify his position. He is a disgusting slime who even now is working to advance Tory policies and many are still taken in by the smarmy git."
Wasn't it the wonderful Jeremy who voted with the opposition (Tory) on a regular basis against Labour policy ? I think the audience Blair is aiming at is within 650 individual MPs due to deadlock and he's saying what current MPs can not in a TV studio. We do have an area of agreement that he's smarmy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France.
Ok then, I'll bet on either within 3 years pm me...didn't see your post"
It's on the calender.
My charity if choice is Barnadoes children's home. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France.
Ok then, I'll bet on either within 3 years pm me...didn't see your post
It's on the calender.
My charity if choice is Barnadoes children's home."
Pm me and download the bet you (v2) app |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France.
Ok then, I'll bet on either within 3 years pm me...didn't see your post
It's on the calender.
My charity if choice is Barnadoes children's home.
Pm me and download the bet you (v2) app"
I am quite happy to keep it on here.
I am sure you will remind me if i get if wrong |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France.
Ok then, I'll bet on either within 3 years pm me...didn't see your post
It's on the calender.
My charity if choice is Barnadoes children's home.
Pm me and download the bet you (v2) app
I am quite happy to keep it on here.
I am sure you will remind me if i get if wrong "
Always pay my debt / bet even when I am wrong. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France.
Ok then, I'll bet on either within 3 years pm me...didn't see your post
It's on the calender.
My charity if choice is Barnadoes children's home.
Pm me and download the bet you (v2) app
I am quite happy to keep it on here.
I am sure you will remind me if i get if wrong "
No I want it on the app so you can't renaig pm me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France.
Ok then, I'll bet on either within 3 years pm me...didn't see your post
It's on the calender.
My charity if choice is Barnadoes children's home.
Pm me and download the bet you (v2) app
I am quite happy to keep it on here.
I am sure you will remind me if i get if wrong
No I want it on the app so you can't renaig pm me."
Never going to happen.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France.
Ok then, I'll bet on either within 3 years pm me...didn't see your post
It's on the calender.
My charity if choice is Barnadoes children's home.
Pm me and download the bet you (v2) app
I am quite happy to keep it on here.
I am sure you will remind me if i get if wrong
No I want it on the app so you can't renaig pm me.
Never going to happen.
"
I am sure you will all take great delight if I loose about how I bottled it
In my day a gentleman's word was his bond or don't you believe in honesty and integrity. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There are people in both the Tory and the Labour party who believe that a second referendum would be a more decisive victory for leave than the last one.
I think I agree with them.
A second referendum will achieve nothing.
You make 2 points.
The first, I sort of agree with, there are people on all sides of the divide who want out of the EU and believe a second referendum will prove them right. But the same is true for the remain side and if there is going to be any chance of repairing the damage done to national unity then their beliefs have also to be considered.
Your second point I find myself contradicting for the following reasons:
Regardless of your position on the issue there is a lack of legitimacy to the result. Not because of the vote, but because of the campaigning prior to the vote. Both sides are accused of misinformation. One side has been found guilty of organised finance violations, the other of using Government finance to influence the vote in favour of the other side. One side is accused of using voter suppression, being a pawn of a hostile foreign power and claiming multiple incompatible outcomes if they prevailed.
Clearly any final settlement that is predicated on such shaky foundations can never realistically claim to have been arrived at legitimately, and every disruption no matter how slight or temporary will only further entrench the divisions brexit has caused or exposed.
With that in mind, another vote (after a deal or no deal has been approved by parliament) is clearly the solution.
There can be no claim that people did not know what brexit they are voting for, there can be no questioning the legitimacy of the vote.
If the vote remains the same or more vote for brexit (a possibility) or more refuse to vote (equally possible) then those who support brexit will be able to legitimately claim victory and claim non votes as votes for brexit. If there is a small swing to remain then as Farage said before the last referendum it will be unfinished business. However if there is a 90 to 100% turnout with an overwhelming vote to remain then the subject will be decided until the EU's next metamorphosis (unlikely but not beyond the bounds of possibility).
However the country votes in a second referendum there can be no claim of foul when it comes to the issue of what brexit means, and therefore such an exercise will achieve something, even if only to confirm that the country is split down the middle and broken beyond repair. Remember, we are a very vocal minority who are claiming to have the right to speak for all when neither side were able to pole even 40% of those eligible to vote.
People who have nothing vote for change. People turned out in unprecedented numbers to vote in the referendum. Another vote, perceived as a threat to democracy by people who already mistrust our leaders, both elected and unelected (Lords, EU commission) would result in a leave victory again.
There is also the point that centrism is collapsing. I'd put money on a FREXIT at some point in the near future. Do we really want to be in to bear the brunt of the collapse of the EU.
Go on then I'll bet you 50 quid it won't happen on the next 3 years!
We'll see. France is currently on fire. There is very strong anti-EU sentiment at the core of this....
So are you accepting the bet? Or being like Centaur?
What's up you bottled it.
I have offered to take your bet.
I think Italy might go before France.
Ok then, I'll bet on either within 3 years pm me...didn't see your post
It's on the calender.
My charity if choice is Barnadoes children's home.
Pm me and download the bet you (v2) app
I am quite happy to keep it on here.
I am sure you will remind me if i get if wrong
No I want it on the app so you can't renaig pm me.
Never going to happen.
I am sure you will all take great delight if I loose about how I bottled it
In my day a gentleman's word was his bond or don't you believe in honesty and integrity."
You are still alive so it is your day! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
