Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum
Very, very well said.Chips wrote: ↑Fri, 24. May 19, 21:07Right.
And we've had our say on European membership, and it voted out. But now you want a say in how that's defined. You've got one, you've elected officials into Parliament. So you've got/had your say already - by the General Election and elected representatives. Just like we have our say in Europe already as you point out above by the exact same mechanism.
Funny you see this one way, but not the reverse...
As I keep saying: No. Because there were no facts. It's unexplored territory. Both sides told lie after lie.BugMeister wrote: ↑Fri, 24. May 19, 21:53- do you seriously think the electorate were kept informed of the facts..??!!
Looking from over the pond, that Boris guy doesnt look very promising
Gimli wrote:Let the Orcs come as thick as summer-moths round a candle!
How was staying in the EU "unexplored territory"? We pretty much knew the consequences of that side of things. Leaving was the big unknown.Golden_Gonads wrote: ↑Sat, 25. May 19, 23:37As I keep saying: No. Because there were no facts. It's unexplored territory. Both sides told lie after lie.
That's a pretty big assumption. People know that it's not as straightforward as some of the campaigners would have like to have made out, and that the politicians they believed, whatever side they were campaigning for, can't necessarily deliver what they promised because the number of different opinions in parliament is almost as great as the number in the country as a whole. More importantly, however, it seems that many people haven't learned much from the whole sorry saga. I heard an interview in which someone claimed that one specific politician (I won't say who, because it doesn't matter) was "the only one telling the truth" when that politician had been demonstrably lying throughout the campaign, and was in fact just saying what that particular voter wanted to hear. So quite frankly, I don't think people are interested in the "facts" now, any more than they were 3 years ago.
Nobody knows; public opinion is still very deeply divided. Some people have changed their minds, some people who were undecided have made up their minds, and some have entrenched their existing positions even more deeply. And it's becoming increasingly obvious that, regardless of what the general population thinks of the idea of a second referendum, the politicians themselves are terrified of finding out the answer that way, because whatever the answer is it would mean there would definitely be no wiggle-room left for them if they don't agree with it.
Fair enough. Though the remain camp did spiel on about how this and that and this were all going to magically improve with a remain vote. But the majority of their argument was anti-leave as opposed to pro-remain.
I reckon, if we re-ran the referendum right now, with the same questions, and not one single person changed their mind, the result would still be different, simply because of demographics. Young people overwhelmingly support the EU, but a lot of them didn't vote last time round; I would expect them to turn out in much larger numbers on a second vote because they know it's really important this time. Furthermore, some of the older, largely pro-Leave voters, will have shuffled off this mortal coil in the three years since the first referendum.
Gimli wrote:Let the Orcs come as thick as summer-moths round a candle!
Of course it wasn't the best way. The only reason it was called in the first place was because the Conservatives were deeply divided on Europe, so David Cameron thought he could get a big referendum win to use to shut down the Euro-sceptic wing of his party--after all, they could hardly continue to argue against European matters if the people voted overwhelmingly in favour of Europe, right? Which all goes to prove the old rule: don't call for a vote on anything unless you're certain what the result is going to be.
I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave earlier:
Feed people a pack of lies for 40 years and then ask them to vote. What could possibly go wrong?CBJ wrote: ↑Thu, 10. Jan 19, 14:25For specifics you can always visit the Euromyths A-Z index. Surely so many years of being fed utter tripe by media and politicians couldn't possibly have had any effect on how people think about the EU now.
Something i find disappointing is...RegisterMe wrote: ↑Mon, 27. May 19, 01:16Well, as much as I don't like it, the Brexit party (formed all of about three weeks ago) has absolutely smashed it out of the park in the EU elections. Sad times, ho hum.
Now, that's from the BBC website, and it's missing some context (does it include SNP in Scotland?In these elections the combined tally for the two parties in favour of a no-deal Brexit, The Brexit Party and UKIP amounts to 35%.
The combined tally for the pro-second referendum parties is 40%.
Which parties are the pro-second referendum - assuming Green, Liberal and SNP, but does it include Labour?. Where are Conservatives counted?) His own constituency voted Liberal.
) "won" by a sizeable margin... and they want WTO trade as a starter (i.e. hard as can be brexit). "interesting" to see what happens over the next few days as people chew on it. Interesting is in quotes because, not really I don't know if they've changed it or if I'm looking at a different page on the BBC site than you are, but it makes it pretty clear now:Chips wrote: ↑Mon, 27. May 19, 03:49Now, that's from the BBC website, and it's missing some context (does it include SNP in Scotland?In these elections the combined tally for the two parties in favour of a no-deal Brexit, The Brexit Party and UKIP amounts to 35%.
The combined tally for the pro-second referendum parties is 40%.
The Conservatives are essentially pro-leave so no need to leave them on the fence, so that's another 9.1% you missed. As far as Labour are concerned, I don't think they even know where they stand but even if they were 50/50 it still looks bad for the anti-Brexit camp.
*I* didn't miss anything, I was quoting from the website...and if you think the Conservatives are entirely pro-Brexit you must not have been following the news for the last thirty years or so. They're probably more split on the issue than the Labour party is.
The split seems to be on how to leave, not whether we should leave.
